God does exist.

[(Q)]

Vienna

You mean that WASN'T another solar system that I saw through my telescope, shheeeesh! I wonder what it was then?

It wasn't another solar system. Perhaps you were viewing through a kaleidescope.

If Q doesn't want to listen then it's his choice, his free will. God won't interfere with his choice.

No one said I didn't want to listen. Please try to follow along and not interject your own opinion as someone else's.

 

[MarcAC]

BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS?

Originally posted by Frencheneesz
"You see, God only knows those who He dwells in and He doesn't dwell in anyone who is evil."

Now the question is: does evil come from the fact that god doesn't "dwell" in that person, or does it come from something else. Does freewill imply randomness?


BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS::

Genesis Chapter 1 sets forth six days of Creation, but Chapter 2 speaks of the "day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens."
Was the fruit trees created before or after men? Genesis Chapter 1 states that the fruit trees were created before man, but Chapter 2 indicates that the fruit trees were created after man.
Was the fowl created out of the waters or the ground? Genesis 1:20 says that the fowl were created out of the waters, but Genesis 2:19 states that the fowl were created out of the ground.
Where do we get light? Genesis 1:2-3 asserts that God created light and divided it from darkness on the first day, but Genesis 1:14-19 says that the sun, moon, and stars were not made until the fourth day.
Was man created before or after the animals? Genesis 1:25-26 states that man was created after the other animals but in Genesis 2:18-19 man was created before the other animals.

Come oooooon French! There you prove you do not understand the Bible again!. Please open that narrow mind of yours. You dismiss Bible verses and then you use them in your 'arguments'. Better to use atheist logic because you ooobviously don't know what you are reading. You are real loony you know that?

There are no contradictions above. In my Bible Gen 2 states WHEN not THE DAY and if you understood the nature of God that wouldn't confound you that much. If you read 2 carefully you realise that God wanted the man to name the animals. Did it say specifically that AFTER God made the man he made tha animals? No.

You know something interesting you can do French? Read Gen 1 in this format. Days 1 & 3; 2 & 5; 4 & 6. And you will notice some parallels. The Bible basically states that a day can mean any amount of time to God. And even with that light crap. How can you say that and defend logic? Does light necessarily mean the creation of our sun and the moon? And better yet how about gas and dust imparing the view of the sun moon and stars? Do you know the theory for the creation of the moon accepted by most? The verse says appear in the sky. It didn't say he created them at that time.

It's better you stick to the irrelevant atheist logic French. Or otherwise drop the atheist affectation.

 

[Cris]

Marc,

I think you were replying to french. I suggest you delete your post and start again.

 

[(Q)]

Truthseeker

However, we still have our own little free will, that usually goes against His will. He never tries to impose His will in us, but when we surrender to Him, He can freely work in us and He will know what we will do.

The problem I see here is that if He has given us free will, which you claim is against His will, why would we bother to surrender to Him ? If He knows what we will do, then it is a foregone conclusion, and the need to provide us with free will of any kind is moot.

As long as our will is different then His will, there will be separation between God and us. He cannot know what He cannot dwell in. So, if you are not surrendered to Him, He cannot work through you and He cannot prevent you from doing what is not of His will.

So, what you're suggesting is the we align our will with His, allowing Him to work through us. Again, I don't see the point in this exercise since He already knows what we'll do, and once we've aligned our will with His, the concept of free will disappears.

As long as you are surrendered to His will He will know what you will do. If you are not surrendered and if you don't accept His plans for you, then He cannot know you (in this sense you are saying to Him: "I don't want you to know me." and He will act accordingly.

If He has plans for you, then the notion of free will cannot exist. If one decides not to align himself with Him, the plan cannot be carried out. One has chosen not to allow Him to carry out His plans. That would appear as the only form of free will which could exist, the choice to be one with one's self.

Again, God is omnipotent, but He let (Q) choose what he wants.

I have not chosen to not allow Him to speak with me. I await His comments. Let Him speak to me now.

I'm listening.

 

[MarcAC]

Re: MarcAC

Originally posted by Adam
Well, let's see what you did in fact write previously:

Now if you want me to repeat myself (obviously you do, because you're an idiot):


Wrong. There was supporting evidence for it.


Wrong. They found supporting evidence suggesting its existence, expected direct evidence, sought direct evidence, and found it.


Wrong. It can indeed be seen interacting. There IS evidence for it. So, oops, yes, it can be, and is, there.

Now for more of your idiocy...


http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6054


Ah, I see. You've shown me the light. When the christians massacred various towns on their march to Jerusalem, many of those town christian but not speaking the appropriate language, your god was there for the inncoent victims? I'm sure they trusted him/her/it. The many scientists and witches burnt over the medieval years? Do you really want people to list examples of instances throughout history where "trust in god" resulted in massacres?




In short, don't ever say anything even vaguely related to science, as you'll no doubt be very wrong. Also, don't ever say anything about me being wrong, because I'm basically too damn smart and you're an idiot. That said, I think I've had enough of repeating the same crap for delusional superstitious freaks. Back to the sapient threads I go...

Supporting evidence? Or gaps that needed* to be filled? Supporting evidence was found ***AFTER*** it was hypothesised [gaps were filled]. Don't try to make me look like I don't know what I'm talking about Adamist. You readwit ha narrow mind Adamist. Open your mind.

 

[MarcAC]

SORRY CRIS!

Originally posted by Cris
Marc,

I think you were replying to french. I suggest you delete your post and start again.

Sorry Cris > Changes were made. But at least you know that those are not contradictions.

 

[(Q)]

Truthseeker

He didn't know. It was Cain's own choice. You see, God only knows those who He dwells in and He doesn't dwell in anyone who is evil. Darkness exists, eventhough that is light. And He didn't punished Cain, Cain's action punished him.

Uh... correct me if I'm wrong here but weren't there only four people known to be alive at this point; Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. How is it God knew Cain was evil yet did not impart this information to Adam, and more importantly, to Abel. God obviously knew Cain would kill Abel and hid this information from all of them thus allowing it to happen. Nay... not just allowing it to happen, but condoning the action as well!

God, in this case, was an accessory to the murder.

 

[Cris]

Marc,

The definition of God places him above human logic. So it is obvious you do not understand who or what God is. So don't try to confine Him to logic.

To be logical has nothing to do with being human, it is universal in the same way that mathematics is universal. It is expected that if we ever make contact with alien life then mathematics will be the first form of communication. We have devised some terminology to help us understand logic and mathematics, but these are just languages, much like the French have an arrangements of letters to describe something that English describes with a different set of letters.

Logic defines things like cause and effect. If this did not exist then we could have someone dying before they were born, or other impossible conditions. It is not that a god would be constrained by logic only that to do otherwise would be nonsense and chaotic.

However, if you want to insist that your god does not use logic then we are in agreement since the only alternative is that God is illogical. Something I have been trying to tell you for a while now.

 

[Frencheneesz]

Jan Ardena:

"Omniscient means “all-knowing,” knowing what people are going to do is called “prediction.” "

This is false. All-knowing means knowing EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING consists of EVERYTHING, including knowledge of the future, past, what can be, what cannot be, in effect EVERYTHING. Prediction is definately NOT KNOWING what people are going to do (that is called knowing...). Prediction is an educated guess that may be wrong and most likely holds errors. I think you would say god can't have any errors right?

In any case I think you are trying to say that god knows all EXCEPT for the future. Right?

"What do you think he meant by; “From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest……………?” "

I have answered that, look at some of my previous posts (use the "find" think in you browser).

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Omniscient means “all-knowing,” knowing what people are going to do is called “prediction.” There are no official departments of knowledge, anywhere, where they teach you the “art” of prediction, because prediction has nothing to do with knowledge.
In all the intelligent descriptions of “knowledge” prediction is not mentioned.

Where does it say that God has mapped out our lives in every minute detail?

You realize that by this reasoning God is bound by time... that is he cannot know the future. I have no problem with this, I just wonder if you realized it.

~Raither

 

[Frencheneesz]

"So... be carefull while reading the Bible! You need to read it in context!"

Could you address things inside it...?

Marc:

"You dismiss Bible verses and then you use them in your 'arguments'."

Um... I'm not using them to support my arguments in the slightest. In fact I am arguing against them... I use them to provide evidence of their contradictory style.

"The Bible basically states that a day can mean any amount of time to God."

Really. This definately changes things. But then why does the bible SPECIFICALLY label days. If a day means anything, then why does the bible label the 7th one as a holy day of rest? Maybe its the year of rest, the millisecond of rest? I think we can all agree that the church thinks sunday is around 24 hours...

Not to mention the bible makes the chronological order quite clear.

"Does light necessarily mean the creation of our sun and the moon?"

What do you think the sun does up there during the day? Sit and watch gods light come over us? THE SUN CREATES LIGHT. That needs not scientific proof, yet we have plenty of that. God creates light, THEN things that create light. Thats a BIG misstep there.

So the answer to your question is YES.

"And better yet how about gas and dust imparing the view of the sun moon and stars?"

What is this? I don't understand your point. Are you saying that the gas and dust could have obscured the stars? You realize this would also mean the blockage of the light they produce...

 

[Frencheneesz]

"You readwit ha narrow mind Adamist. Open your mind."

The earth is flat, do you believe me? If not open your mind.

Truthseeker:

"It comes from the fact that God doesn't dwell in that person."

So doesn't this mean it is god's fault they are evil?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by Raithere
You realize that by this reasoning God is bound by time... that is he cannot know the future. I have no problem with this, I just wonder if you realized it.

~Raither

Please explain.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[MarcAC]

HUMAN LOGIC HAS IT'S RELEVANT APPLICATIONS

Originally posted by Cris
Marc,

To be logical has nothing to do with being human, it is universal in the same way that mathematics is universal. It is expected that if we ever make contact with alien life then mathematics will be the first form of communication. We have devised some terminology to help us understand logic and mathematics, but these are just languages, much like the French have an arrangements of letters to describe something that English describes with a different set of letters.

Logic defines things like cause and effect. If this did not exist then we could have someone dying before they were born, or other impossible conditions. It is not that a god would be constrained by logic only that to do otherwise would be nonsense and chaotic.

However, if you want to insist that your god does not use logic then we are in agreement since the only alternative is that God is illogical. Something I have been trying to tell you for a while now.

I cannot say that when we meet an alien species our method of explaining our surroundings - logic - will be the same as theres. That's where me and you disagree bro. That's presumptious. Just like many have this view that an intelligent alien species will have eyes and hands and feet.

And due to my notion above, logic, the human invention cannot define my God. It is better to say you do not understand God or who or what he is Cris. What is illogical? Whatever our human logic can't explain. If logic was perfect we would know everything there is to know about the universe and our cosmogony. We obviously do not. And some of us refuse to accept the fact that God made us [hint hint].

 

[TruthSeeker]

(Q),

That's the problem, you and I are not absolutely sure he exists. No evidence of his existence can be produced. You think He exists because you have faith. I don't think He exists because I require evidence of His existence. Therefore, neither of us have a choice to accept or not accept his existence, but instead, we have a choice only to think He may or may not exist. Neither of us can be certain.

Unless He talks with one of us...

Perhaps, but you're talking about tangible items, aren't you ? I would presume there is something tangible in the box. If not, then the choice is simply choosing something over nothing. You may need to be a little more descriptive with this example since I cannot understand the relevance.

Choose between something that you like and something that you really like. However, what you really like is in the box and you don't know it. It's like that thing where you put something in you hand and close it, and mix it and the other has to choose one of the hands without knowing where the thing really is...

Why should there be knowledge of what's being chosen ? Cannot one chose an unknown ? Isn't that what religion is all about... choosing an unknown ?

No... I know God... that's why I choose...

The problem I see here is that if He has given us free will, which you claim is against His will, why would we bother to surrender to Him ? If He knows what we will do, then it is a foregone conclusion, and the need to provide us with free will of any kind is moot.

He knows what is the best for us and He wants to do the best for us, so if we surrender to Him we are choosing what is best for us. We have the free will because He Loves us and because He created us so that He wouldn't be alone anymore...
...And to have fun too...

So, what you're suggesting is the we align our will with His, allowing Him to work through us. Again, I don't see the point in this exercise since He already knows what we'll do, and once we've aligned our will with His, the concept of free will disappears.

No, because we choose to do it. In this case we know His will and we follow it, simply that, we chose to follow His will.

If He has plans for you, then the notion of free will cannot exist. If one decides not to align himself with Him, the plan cannot be carried out. One has chosen not to allow Him to carry out His plans. That would appear as the only form of free will which could exist, the choice to be one with one's self.

You don't need to follow His plans, He doesn't make you do so. You have the choice to do it or not. If you choose not to accept, He won't stay in your way.

I have not chosen to not allow Him to speak with me. I await His comments. Let Him speak to me now.

That's because you believe He won't talk with you, and this belief blocks His voice.

Uh... correct me if I'm wrong here but weren't there only four people known to be alive at this point; Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. How is it God knew Cain was evil yet did not impart this information to Adam, and more importantly, to Abel. God obviously knew Cain would kill Abel and hid this information from all of them thus allowing it to happen. Nay... not just allowing it to happen, but condoning the action as well!

He never interfers unless we ask Him to - and that in a way that never interfers with someone's free will.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Please explain.

Certainly; Let's examine your statement.

Omniscient means “all-knowing,” knowing what people are going to do is called “prediction.” There are no official departments of knowledge, anywhere, where they teach you the “art” of prediction, because prediction has nothing to do with knowledge.

Here you differentiate knowledge from 'prediction'. Prediction is indeed different from knowledge for knowledge is certain or 'true' while prediction carries a factor of uncertainty (unless, of course you believe in a purely deterministic Universe in which case free will can't exist anyway). Essentially, you have limited the definition of omniscience to the present and for God we can assume knowledge of the past as well (considering that God would be existent through all the past and we would assume he has a perfect memory). This leaves the future unknown... even for God. Thus, God is bound by time.

~Raithere

 

[(Q)]

arc

I cannot say that when I meet an alien species our method of explaining our surroundings - logic - will be the same as theirs.

Why not ? One plus one will still equal two. A measurement of distance or quantity will be the same. Gravity will influence them as it influences us. Why should anything be any different aside from the obvious advances in technologies ?

If logic was perfect we would know everything there is to know about the universe and our cosmogony. We obviously do not

We may have accomplished a great deal more by now, however, in the past, the theists have done everything in their power to suppress the sciences. If they would just keep their noses out of the business of science, in time, we might know everything there is to know about the universe.

 

[Cris]

Jan,

We’ve been here before.

If he is omniscient he KNOWS with perfect accuracy everything that we are GOING to do.

Omniscient means “all-knowing,” knowing what people are going to do is called “prediction.”…… prediction has nothing to do with knowledge.

Predicting the future I think is called clairvoyance, but whatever.

You are making my point for me. Omniscience isn’t about predicting the future. Omniscience is about knowing with certainty, without doubt, what has happened, what is happening and what is going to happen. To an omniscient god a future event (for us) is no different than having knowledge of a past event. Omniscience means he has full knowledge of any event whenever it happens. To him time cannot have any meaning as it does to us.

Prediction and Knowledge are two different things, get that into your head.

I think that is what I’m trying to tell you.

If your god is omniscient then every action you are ever going to perform will have been mapped out to the minutest detail and you will have had absolutely no say in the matter.

Nonesense, that is not what knowledge means. Where does it say that God has mapped out our lives in every minute detail?

Give it some more thought in the light of how I have described omniscience.

Think of say a road map of a country. You can see at a glance every detail on the map. Imagine now a map of events over time. An omniscient god will have the ability to look at every detail on the map showing every event past, present and future, as if they are all in the same timeframe. This is omniscience.

However, if the events on the map can change, i.e. a human decides to do something else (the exercise of free will), then the map will be invalid and therefore omniscience would be impossible. The map only works if humans cannot change it (have no free will).

Now you could argue that the map is dynamic and can be forever changing (humans exercising free will) but that means it is useless, it would nullify the effect of omniscience. It would be like looking at your road map, planning your route and the next instant the map shows something entirely different.

The existence of omniscience and human free are therefore mutually exclusive.

If omniscience is possible and the map is valid, then who wrote/designed the map? Since God is the creator of everything it looks like he is the culprit. Once the map is written then all human actions will be fixed in place. Remember that this map (omniscience) enables god to see all events from the beginning of time to the end of time. Human free will can play no part.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Frencheneesz,

Could you address things inside it...?

Yes, but mainly in the same chapter. And being very carefull with the meaning of the words.

So doesn't this mean it is god's fault they are evil?

No because it was their choice.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by Frencheneesz
Jan Ardena:

"Omniscient means “all-knowing,” knowing what people are going to do is called “prediction.” "

This is false. All-knowing means knowing EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING consists of EVERYTHING, including knowledge of the future, past, what can be, what cannot be, in effect EVERYTHING. Prediction is definately NOT KNOWING what people are going to do (that is called knowing...). Prediction is an educated guess that may be wrong and most likely holds errors. I think you would say god can't have any errors right?

In any case I think you are trying to say that god knows all EXCEPT for the future. Right?

"What do you think he meant by; “From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest……………?” "

I have answered that, look at some of my previous posts (use the "find" think in you browser).

God knows the future because He has set nature on a path, He knows there are two possibilities for humans, they either become self-realised (become spiritual) or they get caught up in the cycle of birth and death (remain material).
Becoming self-realised, is the reason we have free will, getting caught up in the birth and death cycle, is nature (animalistic).
It doesn't matter which course you follow, when you are not self-realised, the only future is death. That is the knowledge.
God knows what is in our hearts, when we act it is with a purpose, we predetermined our future before we act, not God.

Look up the word "knowledge" in any dictionary, and you will find that it has nothing to do with knowing what people will do next, it is about knowing and understanding how things work.

The wages of sin is "DEATH"
The gift of God is "ETERNAL LIFE."

Love

Jan Ardena.