Omniscience vs. Human free will. A paradox.

Omniscience vs. Human Free will. A Paradox.

Omniscience: Perfect knowledge of past and future events.
Free will: Freedom to choose between alternatives without external coercion.
Paradox: Statements or events that have contradictory and inconsistent properties.

Proposal: Christianity cannot claim that God is omniscient and also claim that humans have free will. The claims form a paradox, a falsehood.

Reasoning:

If God is omniscient then even before we are born God will have complete knowledge of every decision we are going to make.

Any apparent choice we make regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior is predetermined. This must be true to satisfy the assertion that God is omniscient. Effectively we have no choice in the matter. What we think is free will is an illusion. Our choices have been coerced since we exist and act according to the will of God.

Alternatively if human free will is valid, meaning that the outcome of our decisions is not pre-determined or coerced, then God cannot be omniscient, since he would not know in advance our decisions.

Question:

If God knows the decision of every individual, before they are born, regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior, then why does he create one set of individuals destined for heaven and another set destined for eternal damnation? This seems unjust, perverse and particularly evil.

Conclusions:

If God is omniscient then humans do not have free will (see argument above) and the apparent arbitrary choice of God to condemn many individuals to eternal damnation is evil. I.e. God does not possess the property of omni benevolence and is therefore not worth our attention.

If humans have true free will then God cannot be omniscient (see argument above). If he is not omniscient then he also cannot be omnipotent since knowledge of the future is a prerequisite for total action. Without these abilities God can no longer be deemed a god – i.e. God does not exist.

If humans do not have free will then the choice of whether to choose Jesus as a savior or not makes total nonsense of Christianity since the choice is pre-determined and we are merely puppets at the hands of an evil monster.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"4 Where wast though when I laid the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hathe stretched the line across it? 6 On what are its bases grounded on? or who laid the cornerstone thereof..."-Job 38:4-6, from the New Catholic Version of the Bible..

By definition, you cannot understand or question an omiscient being. The passage above demonstrates that effectively (it is from the speech God gives Job)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Specific commentary:

Cris: What is the sound of one hand clapping? I would use both, but my other hand is covering my chest to bestill my beating heart. Strong construction ... heck of a post.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Corp. Hudson: On the one hand, you have an excellent point. I think it's undermined, though, by the fact that it comes from Job. We are, of course, witnessing the tale of God allowing the ravaging of one of his children merely to prove a point to an accuser. You are correct, though, when we assert that an omniscient being is impossible to describe in full. That's partially why the present version of Abramic God is such a "mutt" construction: whatever works from Newton; whatever works from Anselm & Aquinas; whatever works from Paul, Gregory, Augustine, &c. All the while ignoring the mystics, who are fully aware of the possibility that God simply isn't. Not "nothing", but "No-Thing".

General commentary, topic post:

Accepted according to Reasoning presented.

Proposal: That theists tend to view humanity (in general), and their immediate culture (specifically) as the center of God's will. We ask our purpose in the Universe, while never knowing what purpose the Universe, itself serves.

Reasoning (somewhat informal):

That, as finite beings, we humans are incapable of calculating infinite concepts.

That, as an infinite being, God exists outside of human conceptions of time.

That, as God exists out of time, it is difficult to describe his relationship to time. Thus, if we might accept analogy, I would propose that the Universe exists to God in the same way a camera flash or firecracker explosion might. Whereas we, the finite, perceive a single event, what we witness is actually an intricate combination of processes, or a subtle collective process. The Universe may be much like this to whatever perspective composes God. We, being part of the firecracker explosion, see each phase of the process occurring, yet, being part of the explosion, cannot witness it from without. Where our concerns might involve the heat at the center of the explosion, God the Objectivist might also be concerned with the air currents at the periphery of the explosion. In other words, what we do within the process/event of the Universe is necessary to its outcome, much like working a hypothesis or calculating a quadratic formula. The answer is predictable from the right perspective.

Thus, we might indeed have a false sense of free will; but to assume that God knows beforehand implies the human concept of "before and after", which does not apply to an entity outside recognized time. God, by the standard of all-knowledge, simply knows ... there is no beforehand.

What this creates, from God's perspective, is the idea that yes, God knows what should happen ... even what will happen, as such, works at this point. But it's an ongoing process with an intended result which, while it may or may not involve humanity, does not make humanity the centerpiece of the operation. Thus, if humans are components of God's Universe, it may be that the experimental conditions allow for "free will". As the explosion progresses, the data is revealed, but when the "event" of the processes is complete, and the history of events within the process is reviewed, we might find that no other method existed to cause the final outcome of the experiment. Thus, we have free will, and the result of our free will is exactly what God expects.

Conclusion: That the paradox of free will arises from a human shortsightedness regarding our station in the Universe. Humanity acts by its own accord, though the events and processes of its doings can equate to a natural balance with the "will of God". Insofar as we limit ourselves to humanized conceptions of God, that God will experience human limitations. That God cannot escape the paradox proposed is a predictable result of limiting an infinite concept to finite terms. God may well exist ... God may well be omniscient. But the God we have come to know, of Universal creation, of redemption, and of eternal meddling, cannot exist without paradox.
_________________________

Irrelevant?

Apologies for the patchwork presentation; it's fairly spontaneous for the moment, since I'll forget to get back to this when I have more time.

Also, I wanted to comment on another part of the topic post ....

I'll have to dig for the name of the philosopher (90% of my library is in boxes right now), but Jeffrey Russel Burton, in Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages did touch on that idea somewhat. I'm quite sure I've got the concept, but I'm not quoting directly:

Sometimes I think it must suck to be God.

thanx all,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

------------------
Whether God exists or does not exist, He has come to rank among the most sublime and useless truths.--Denis Diderot


[This message has been edited by tiassa (edited September 15, 2000).]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Darn it ... I didn't come all the way around on that last one. I'll try to patch it up later, if it confuses anyone, but I'd rather let it stand right now ... must get out the door to some silly corporate event.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

------------------
Whether God exists or does not exist, He has come to rank among the most sublime and useless truths.--Denis Diderot

 

Extra dimensions of time

Paradox resolved

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

God may see the future but that does not eliminate free will. The future is where our free will decisions that we make will lead us. God can see where our decisions will lead us. Where is the paradox?

"If God knows the decision of every individual, before they are born, regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior, then why does he create one set of individuals destined for heaven and another set destined for eternal damnation? This seems unjust, perverse and particularly evil."

Strawman. Evil and perverse mean what? That which is away from God's will. That is the real paradox in this thread

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What is really unjust is that the set doomed for hell, due to their own free will decisions, has used their own free will to freely reject God's free gift of eternal life through Christ's sacrifical death on the cross.

I saw a very interesting verse in the Old Testament. it was about accidental deaths and the punishment that should ensue. It mentioned something like "and if God allows it to happen." Apparently, God is God and has his reasons for things even if we don't always understand them.

Peace,
Vinnie



[This message has been edited by ilgwamh (edited September 16, 2000).]

 

It looks to me like Corp.Hudson's point was that you cannot assume that HUMAN logic is applicable when trying to explain the existence of God...or the contradictions in relation to free will and such. I'm not a zealot, but I do think it is a valid argument to say that we just might be too small to resolve such paradoxes, even more so when you consider our limited understanding of the universe.

------------------
It's all very large.

 

Sorry about the big post in folks.

Tiassa,
Youmakamegrinlotsa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Why do I get the distinct feeling that we are starting to see things in a similar vane?
Why Do I feel like the words you speak are words that we have spoken before?
Maybe because they are?
So your starting to see what I¡¦m ranting about all the time

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

That makes me very, very happy and encouraged.
I quote from another thread that was leading in the same direction and same question, I apologise to those who tire from my repeated quotes and find them annoying. Please feel free to read around them.

Thanks T6 for the questions, man I hope not too many others ask me questions because I just don¡¦t got the time to answer them all.

I had a little problem in that I don't remember the God is imperfect part

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If I have stated this then I have made a very big boo-boo, and as such apologise profusely for any confusion caused.

I do like your questions however, they¡¦re very valid and I would like to respond to excerpts of them.

Well I don¡¦t think He is imperfect and am sorry again if I gave this impression or stated it somewhere. Darn well doesn¡¦t help the cause in trying to get people to understand who He is if I make such fundamental errors in my posts does it? So that basically puts Him back in the job with the right qualifications for it.

Yeah that whole time, come possible outcomes, come end result thing didn¡¦t quite happen the way I picture things in my minds eye.

God does have the foresight to see every possible outcome regardless of the infinite amount of variables that are involved.

I just had a picture of what I¡¦m trying to get at come into my mind, I¡¦ll try my best to capture it in words for us.

God sits external to our frames of reference, time, space, etc, and at the same time also internal to them as a part of their dynamics and functioning.

Within Gods macro view (In other words taking an external view of all) of all possible outcomes with all possible actions and reactions there are two extremes.

One is that the end result will be that all of humankind suffering a lost eternity. Complete rejection of Him and all that He would desire for them by a choice of their own free will.

Two is that all of humankind come to a place of restoration with Him as their creator. A place of appreciation and recognition of who He is and what He has done on their behalf, and again by choice of their own free will.

And in between each extreme view is a seemingly infinite number of possible outcomes based on freewilled actions, decisions and reactions of humankind, physical actions and reactions of time, space and matter, etc. Remember the Tony makes a decision multiply by X multiply, multiply etc.

So God knows the totality of all possibilities and works within the constraints and confines of this realm to effect the best possible outcome He can influence whilst maintaining the integrity of His very character and nature. At the same time also ensuring that His attributes work with freewilled man within the confines of who He is.

This is how I can say that God is limitless and yet limited. He is limitless in His capacity to see and comprehend all things, all outcomes, all eventualities. Yet He limits Himself in the very way He interacts with His creation to ensure that they are Not completely destroyed by His Holiness and to ensure that He does not contradict His very own Character and Nature.

How else can I put this?

Pick the smallest number between 0 and 1, then divide it by 2. Darn it did it just get smaller? OK divide it by 2 again. What even smaller? Ok divide it by 10000000000000000000000000.......0

Still got a number? Yes you do, even between fixed constraints such as those that God sees in His micro vision of us there are infinite possible outcomes depending on the variables applied or the decisions made.

Pick the largest number you can think of, then multiply it by 2. Darn it did it just get bigger? OK multiply it by 2 again. What even bigger? Ok multiply it by 10000000000000000000000000........0

Still get a bigger number? Yes you do, even beyond fixed constraints such as those that God sees in His macro vision of us there are infinite possible outcomes depending on the variables applied or the decisions made.

God is limitless in His perception of the macro and the micro. We are limited in the time of our existence, the number of decisions we make and the possible myriad of outcomes through actions, reactions and interactions although seemingly infinite to us are within the constraints of Gods perspective. Like Him looking at 0 and 1, and yet at the same time the variables within are limitless within these constraints.

This is mind bending hey?

So in saying this one would then naturally assume that there are a finite number of possible outcomes. This would be based on the fact that as a universe that is a debateable number of years old there has to this very moment in time occurred if measurable XYZ number of actions and reactions that have occurred at a subatomic through to universal level.

Remember every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Well this stands true for direct physical interactions based on prior reactions, repeat ad nauseam. But a new question arises:

What changes the outcome of an action and reaction?

What gives us the unexpected outcome?

What causes things to not happen the way we have planned for them to happen or even expect that they will happen?

Answer = Choice, freewill, decision making.

OK try to pull it all together time:

Man this is hard, my grey matter HP is in overdrive trying to come up with the words needed to explain something almost intangible.

Why Did God not see the final outcome and just fix it before it happened?

Answer = He did and He didn¡¦t, He saw every possible outcome with every possible decision and every possible action and every possible reaction within the constraints that these events were occurring like looking at an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1. Which actual line or series of events would transpire out of every possible and plausible interaction and decision should He have planned on? Scary numbers hey? A little thing called free will that God designed into us at the creation of us so that we could have a meaningful and living relationship with Him rather than simply being drones on remote control to do His bidding. This simple little attribute that was placed in us because we are created in His image and He has this ability. This wonderful gift that was instilled into the dust that we are made of when God breathed life into us. This fraction of a moment ability, this thing that drives us to decide that we have rights, this thing that causes wars and peace amongst us, this thing that drives us to seek fulfilment and when we don¡¦t achieve it leaves us feeling empty.

Choice, decision, freewill all one and the same is the very reason why God allowed for what transpired to transpire. Why the events of past history are recorded and yet future history stands before us as though a hazy mist that we can dimly see a way forward through.

Do you see what I am saying T6? Do you see the awesomeness of the God I serve and yet at the same time the frailty? Do you see the anguish of knowing the darkest dark that can befall humankind and at the same time the most wondrous glory? Do you see the anguish and frustration of knowing that? And knowing that you are limited in and by the very character and nature you possess and by the very holiness that you are in the manner through which you can interact with your creation because this very thing. This thing called freewill and decision that has created a barrier, a disease between you both, a disease called sin.

God knew every possible outcome, God knew these things, He knew every decision that could be made for every situation, but what He did not know was which decision would be made? That is the very decisions that men would make and which exact path that these decisions would lead humankind on in the infinite number of possible outcomes. But God having made man, having fashioned him and breathed life into him knew the very nature of His creation, knowing this God could more accurately gauge the probable directions that we would take. So God being true to Himself had to deal with man in a way to affect the best possible outcome whilst maintaining His integrity.

Remember when I first came here? How I spoke of our perception of God, of how our view of Him is limited because if He were to reveal all that He is to us we would in no way be able to withstand it, even as eternal creatures we would be destroyed by all that He is. Remember how I said that we are limited by our five senses and that with them and the range of emotions that God has endowed us with God reveals Himself to us. The interface between the two, the soul with all our emotions, and the body with all our senses, the interface between these parts of our being and God is our spirit. This is why Jesus stated that the time is coming when those who worship the Father will worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. To worship God in spirit is to be subject to the Holy Spirit of God and His control in our lives. This is called the Kingdom of God, this is why Jesus could say that the Kingdom of God is within you and why the Apostle Paul spoke of us as being the temple of the Holy Spirit. The Kingdom of God is a Kingdom that rules and reins in the hearts of people through obedience in love to the Holy Spirit and His truth. His truth being the Word of God that becomes written on our hearts and flows from within us like rivers of living waters.

I do hope that what I am saying makes sense to people, I do pray that God will open the eyes to see the truth.

The core of your question, why wait X generations before cutting them off? Why not just not allow them to exist in the first place? Why not just see that they would do what they did and stop it all? Why not stop them in the first generation so that the situation does not become exasperated and elevated?

I know it comes back to His character and the limits that His mercy places on Him before exacting His judgement. I don¡¦t know the exact whys for every situation because I don¡¦t have all the facts. But I do know that by the limits that God places on Himself, even not knowing those exact limits I do know that by these limits He acts. He acts in accordance with them so as to not contradict His very person. At what point exactly does He say enough and NO MORE! I don¡¦t know? I just don¡¦t know at this place in my walk with Him. Should He consider that I am capable of dealing with that knowledge and knowing how to use it to His glory then I am sure He will show me and that ¡K¡K..well being honest with you, I don¡¦t think knowing the person that I am, that this will happen to soon. I¡¦ve got a lot to learn and understand about what He has given me without Him overloading all those emotions, senses etc that I talked about earlier ƒº

I do cry out to know Him better, to be closer to His heart, to be able to see Him beyond my human abilities, to be walking in obedience to His word and ways. And with these things alone I have a long, long journey ahead let alone Him showing me more.

I like the story of Moses a lot and I have probably shared this before, but what the heck

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Moses was a man I can relate to in a big way, early in his life (40) he made a mistake that cost a life. This caused him to flee into the wilderness and essentially disappear for about 40 years. We don¡¦t hear a lot about those 40 years and what he went through, we know a lot about what happened after he returned from it but what about during it?

What kind of wilderness experience was it? What did it drive him to or from? What kind of sorting of his beliefs took place? What did he dream of as he wandered through the lonely hills and valleys tending cattle and sheep? On the star filled nights when he was alone with his thoughts and the God of his ancestors that he felt he desperately failed, what kind of sorting of his mind, his heart, his emotions took place?

Its for me a bit like your question T6, you¡¦d like to know the answer, you¡¦d like to understand, but sometimes these things are a little beyond us aren¡¦t they?

Rest assured my friend I don¡¦t know it all, but having considered and thought deeply about my God. Having spent time with Him just reading about Him and having asked Him into my life, I know 100% iron clad that there is an answer to all our questions. If I ever fully understand God¡¦s timing and the way He interacts with us 100% I think I will be older than this body I currently inhabit is capable of.

Can I ask a question in return?

Why do you want to know this?

For what reason do you ask?

Allcare

Tony H2o


[This message has been edited by Tony H2o (edited September 16, 2000).]

 

I think you people are seeing holes where there are none. For one thing, Yahweh could not be omniscient if he didn't know every single thing, where every particle in the universe is/was/will be, what you will do at the beginning of time (or at least the beginning of his omniscience), what you could have done, and the outcomes of all the events that could have happened, throughout all time. There is no possible way, in the true sense of the word omniscience, that Yahweh could not know exactly what actions you would take, before you were even born. Unless he knows EVERYTHING that can/will/did/could happen, he isn't omniscient (something close, maybe, but not omniscient), and because Yahweh would have to know EVERYTHING, you have no freewill, because your actions are predestined. Now if you do have freewill, then Yahweh isn't omniscient, nor is he omnipotent. If you are omnipotent, you must necessarily be omniscience, because if you're one you can make yourself the other. If you're not one, you're neither. And since omnipotence is logically impossible (the old "Can God create a rock so heavy that even he couldn't lift?" argument, and its many variations), Yahweh isn't omnipotent or omniscient.

[This message has been edited by Someone7 (edited September 16, 2000).]

 

"because Yahweh would have to know EVERYTHING, you have no freewill, because your actions are predestined. Now if you do have freewill, then Yahweh isn't omniscient, nor is he omnipotent. If you are omnipotent, you must necessarily be omniscience, because if you're one you can make yourself the other. If you're not one, you're neither."

Hmm, infinite awareness and unlimited influence on the part of god... I suppose that you could say that if god created everything, then your past, present, and future actions are also god's creation. This would negate any claims to free will. With your logic, you could also say that god created the devil and all things evil." So, we are puppets then? <img src = "http://www.exosci.com/ubb/icons/icon7.gif">

------------------
It's all very large.

 

“Hmm, infinite awareness and unlimited influence on the part of god... I suppose that you could say that if god created everything, then your past, present, and future actions are also god's creation. This would negate any claims to free will. With your logic, you could also say that god created the devil and all things evil."

My logic is the only logic that should be used in this debate. You can’t say Yahweh is omniscient and that we have freewill by saying that he only knows the outcome of events that we could take, because that isn’t omniscience. And yes, saying Yahweh is omniscient creates more paradoxes than just the freewill argument. If Yahweh is omniscient, he knew we would eat the fruit, he knew Satan would turn against him, he knew he would wipe out everyone on Earth again in the Flood, etc, etc, as soon as he came into existence (or whenever he got omniscient). Saying that we can’t know if he is omniscient because we don’t understand omniscience is just stupid. We thought up the concept, and later applied it to the Yahweh, obviously we can comprehend it enough to understand what it is, even though we can’t truly understand what it would be like to be omniscient. Besides, that argument just makes Yahweh incoherent, and who wants to worship an incoherent god?

“So, we are puppets then?”

Depends if you think Yahweh is omniscient or not. If he is, then yes we are puppets, if he isn’t, it doesn’t really hurt him (besides making him just a little less glorious). He could be nearly omniscient and nearly omnipotent, not really a big difference.

 

"Depends if you think Yahweh is omniscient or not. If he is, then yes we are puppets, if he isn’t, it doesn’t really hurt him (besides making him just a little less glorious). He could be nearly omniscient and nearly omnipotent, not really a big difference."

I thought that was your message. <img src = "http://www.exosci.com/ubb/icons/icon7.gif">

------------------
It's all very large.

[This message has been edited by Bowser (edited September 16, 2000).]

 

The only thing I disagree with in Cris's reply is when he says:

"If he is not omniscient then he also cannot be omnipotent since knowledge of the future is a prerequisite for total action. Without these abilities God can no longer be deemed a god – i.e. God does not exist."

My objection has to do with the word god. You can be a god without being omniscient, omnipotent, transcendent, omnipresent, perfect, etc, etc. The other gods weren't like that, they just controlled some aspect of nature, like the sea or death. If I started running amuck downtime throwing fireballs and flying around at 600 Mph, I think it would be safe to call me a god, if only a lesser one. Just to clarify, here are some definitions of the word god:

god - A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality: An image of a supernatural being; an idol: One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: A very handsome man: A powerful ruler or despot.

Now God with a capitol G has a definition as follows:

God - A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions; The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.

It is safe to say that God doesn't exist, because the concept is logically impossible (see above for why omnipotence is impossible, and for why omniscience is impossible with an all-good God and freewill), though Yahweh could just be really, really, really powerful instead of omniscient and omnipotent, making him a god and not God.

I don't really see how saying he isn't omniscient or omnipotent hurts Christianity though, certainly claiming Yahweh is the logically impossible is more damaging than claiming he isn't.

 

The old rock question? You know that argument has no truth value to it. When asking if God can make a bigger rock than he can lift you are using improper referents and relations.

Also, God may be omnipotent but traditional theology limits him slightly. For instance, the book of James says it is impossible for God to be tempted by evil.

"First, Omnipotence has historically been understood as the ability to perform any task consistent with His character and essence. (At least that's the classical definition/understanding of it)." http://www.webcom.com/ctt/HGodRock.html

Here is another quote from the thinktank:

"Secondly, there are some things that we can build pseudo-sentences about, that actually don't end up being 'tasks'...some can be quite comical...

"Can God make this question into a declarative sentence?"
"Can God change the subject of this sentence to 'jello'?"
"Can God make this sentence so long that he cannot read it?"
"Can God make the slithy toves gyre and gimble in the wabe?"
(for any fellow Alice-in-Wonderland-Enthusiasts out there!)

These 'sentences' seem odd to us, for they look like regular sentences, but they have what philosophers of language call 'ungrammaticality' (cf.Language and Reality--An Introduction to the Philosophy of Language, by Michael Devitt & Kim Sterelny, MIT Press, pps.89-92).

Then there is another class of sentences in which grammaticality is present, but there are improper referents and relations, similar to the linguists' favorite: "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously". These sentences (and any questions based upon them like "Do colorless green ideas sleep furiously?") are said to have no truth value (neither true nor false)--they just don't have any meaning to BE true or false."

http://www.webcom.com/ctt/HGodRock.html

Peace,
Vinnie

 

"God - A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions; The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being."

Logically speaking...couldn't such a being define free will and good based solely on it's subjective views--despotic resolve?

------------------
It's all very large.

 

“The old rock question? You know that argument has no truth value to it. When asking if God can make a bigger rock than he can lift you are using improper referents and relations.”

True, the question is rather meaningless, but not because of the linguistics involved, but because of an argument can be made that doing the logically impossible (i.e. making rocks heavier than he can lift, making square circles, etc, etc) doesn’t count, but I can always say omnipotence requires the ability to do the logically impossible, and it just turns into who can come up with the best rhetoric.

“Logically speaking...couldn't such a being define free will and good based solely on it's subjective views--despotic resolve?”

Then our subjective notion of freewill is inconsistent with his. He may know the true definition of freewill (since he “defined” it), and it may be consistent with his omniscience, but it doesn’t matter. Our concepts of freewill and omniscient are inconsistent with each other, which is all that matters.

 

"Our concepts of freewill and omniscient are inconsistent with each other, which is all that matters

According to Christian view, the Bible is God's definition of omnisient and freewill. If this is true, it is our own subjective logic which contradicts God's existence.

------------------
It's all very large.

 

“According to Christian view, the Bible is God's definition of omnisient and freewill. If this is true, it is our own subjective logic which contradicts God's existence.”

So if I looked up the Bible in a dictionary, I would get the definition of “What Yahweh thinks is omniscient and freewill”? I’m not sure what that sentence is supposed to mean. Besides, what I meant was, if our concept of freewill was different than Yahweh’s, it wouldn’t matter, since our concept is still inconsistent with omniscience, meaning that even though the concept could be different, it is still just as valid as a concept all on it’s own, even though it differs from the concept defined by Yahweh.

Besides, is there a logical reason to believe the Judeo-Christian-(and possibly)-Muslim god exists? Without a logical reason to believe such a being exists, there is no logical reason to even speculate what Yahweh thinks/does/etc/etc.


[This message has been edited by Someone7 (edited September 17, 2000).]

 

Bowser,

Actually, according to the Bible, this is the case.

<font color="red">Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.</font>

I suspect this idea was lifted from Hermetic Philosophy, which says that good and evil are merely opposite poles of the same thing. Without darkness, there is no light; without evil, there is no good. You cannot have only a north pole on a magnet, there must be a south pole as well. Therefore, God could not have created good without creating evil as well. Or, to quote The Kybalion on the Principle of Polarity:

Blessings,

Emerald

------------------
An ye harm none, do what ye will.

 

'So if I looked up the Bible in a dictionary, I would get the definition of “What Yahweh thinks is omniscient and freewill”?'

No, I suggest that the Bible (or any other religiose article) is a definition of God, life, and free will. The Christian Bible will give you a more in-depth definition of omniscient and freewill than that which is offered in your dictionary. The presumption being that the Bible is the word of God, your dictionary is not then an authority, but merely a reflection of the human mind and its limitations.

How's my rhetoric? <img src = "http://www.exosci.com/ubb/icons/icon12.gif">


Emerald,

<hr>
With your logic, you could also say that god created the devil and all things evil.

"Actually, according to the Bible, this is the case."
<hr>

I understand that. I was exploring the possibilities of S7's logic and how it fits into the Bible. I vaguely remember a reference to the devil being made in the Bible...something about being the most beautiful angel God had created... I'm sure someone out there can post the exact passage.

------------------
It's all very large.

 

“No, I suggest that the Bible (or any other religiose article) is a definition of God, life, and free will. The Christian Bible will give you a more in-depth definition of omniscient and freewill than that which is offered in your dictionary. The presumption being that the Bible is the word of God, your dictionary is not then an authority, but merely a reflection of the human mind and its limitations.”

Are you sure about that? Can you cite passages in the bible that will give me more in-depth definitions of these words than a dictionary? I don’t presume the Bible was divinely inspired anymore than I presume that the Greek gods inspired Homer when he wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey. Like I asked in my last post, is there any logical reason to even speculate on the existence of Yahweh?