That's your best response? I point out that you still haven't done anything to back up your claims and all you can do is ask if I have anything "thought-provoking"? Congratulations, you just achieved "complete waste of time" status. Goodbye.
No, they don't. Belief in the message of prophet Isa (as) or Jesus Christ doesn't excuse ignorance of other faiths. Who are you to say whom will go to jahannam and who doesn't? It is only God whom can do this, it is only God whom can judge the soul of a man, humans can't do this nor should we assume or cast judgement upon others whom disbelieve. Was it not said in the Gospels: "And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted."-Luke, 18:9-14, New Testament, KJV.
This is very unclear to me. Why would "existence" be predicated on Predestination? I think I can easily show you where the mistake lies. You claimed God can "do anything". Well then, I ask you: Can God create a reality where predestiny can not exist? Is THAT possible or impossible for God to do? If it is NOT possible, then God can not do everything. If it IS possible, then your reasoning is non sequitur .... as you suggest predestiny is a necessity of reality. So? Which is it? Oh, by the way: Can God learn something new?
Buddhism says there is no hell except the endless cycle of rebirth, that's why. In the end it's just one fantasy hell ride against another. Who's fantasy is worse?
I'm giving this another shot. Created entities have a beginning and are sequential. Philosophically speaking it's quite clear that people, trees, sky, birds are entities that are possible in their existence. IOW these things don't have to exist they may or may not exist they are only intrinsically possible. It cannot be honestly said that they are things that must exist. In our existence we ourselves, everything we perceive, and what happens to us are also only intrinsically possible. And this is also supported by the fact that our existences are in sequences and have beginnings. Since we are only intrinsically possible we didn't make ourselves exist and specify everything to be the way they are, so surely we were specified to be what we are hence we are predestined.
As opposed to actual? So what you're effectively saying is more or less what you said before, but in a more flowery manner. You're still assuming "specified" and "predestined". Does nothing, ever, "just happen"?
Such specifications just popping into existence or is it after an infinite amount of trial and error also resulting in infinite regress?
Could you put that first part in English please? And again you're making assumptions. Why do you need an infinite regress? Is it not possible to get something right the first time? Or the fiftieth? Could there not be parallel attempts?
That is a different topic of can something just come into existence from nothing. Parallel or however you put it as long as it involves sequences, or quantity it results in infinite regress.
No God cannot create a reality that is not predestined because He would be predestining it just by creating it ,and if it's not predestined then it's not created and exists eternally and beginninglessly which cannot be said of sequences of events as that would result in infinite regress. This is a satanic question. How can God learn something new when He must be omniscient. This kind of statements seems to have a meaning when they really don't what happens is two propsitions of opposing meanings are brought together to try to form one meaning but the opposite meanings cancel each other out and becomes devoid of a meaning e.g. a completely round square. I.e. God can do anything but your question was about an absurdity.
An interesting argument against the existence of that particular God - reductio ad absurdum, by the discoveries of twentieth century physicists. But I don't buy it. I don't see why a God of that kind could not create something that would evolve, incorporating events of probabilistic assurance only.
Really? How interesting. No, not really. Nor is it interesting. That would be a belief you have, not a fact.
Something coming from nothing is such a nonsense that it is in fact equivalent to the argument of infinite regress.
Wow! Can I see your calculations that confirm this please? Because physics seems to think differently. Again, you're spouting belief as if it were fact. Try reading this thread (and the linked documents), maybe you'll get an education in reality, as opposed to wishful thinking.
It sounds like God can not create creatures with freewill then. It it can't make a future that isn't predetermined then this really is, under that paradigm, like living out a movie written, directed and produced by God. How utterly boring. One wonders why God wrote scenes with such sicking child-abuse and murder when such wasn't necessary. Why predestine a child to have her face ripped off by a Lion? That's just sick. Can God create another God that is equal to God? One free of God? Satanic? Is this another way of saying you do not like to think about logical questions? Think about the social implications of that, as well as the state of affairs in the ME. Is there a connection? I agree, an all knowing God can not learn. Therefor an all knowing God can not do some things that YOU can do. If you can do things God can not, then it is illogical to say God is all powerful (can do anything). God is a round square - that is, God as you have defined It, does not exist. Which is why you probably felt such a question was "Satanic". It's not, it's very very simple logic. Creating a society afraid to use logical at this simple level results in poor, superstitious populations of people (see: Pakistan). Interestingly, the Europeans went through such a period. But, I think (thankfully) Christianity wasn't all consuming and people were allowed to get on with their lives. As they noticed things in nature didn't add up to what they were taught in the Bible, they didn't shun learning and logic, they really got fired up to get out there and learn. Hence they made grand discoveries ushering in the modern age. In this sense, Islam is stunting not only your own progress, but the whole of Nations progress. People have to be allowed to question the Qur'an and progress past its superstitions or remain indefinitely dependent on the West (and soon to be East) for Scientific and Social advancements. All things have their time and place. The age of superstition has passed and is coming to an end (a few more generations at most).
