Then explain why it isn't.Blimey 82 pages. I can't read all of those. The above isn't a Paradox.
Then explain why it isn't.Blimey 82 pages. I can't read all of those. The above isn't a Paradox.
@SciWriter --
I saw an interesting lecture about this once, perhaps I'll post a video in the physics subforum.
Free will was given as a test to man. Man is obviously king of the jungle, but we dont need our free will to be so.. so how did it evolve?..
Free will is a supposition.Free will was given as a test to man
We don't live in a jungle.Man is obviously king of the jungle
Well, according to you it was given to us. But you're hardly a reliable source.but we dont need our free will to be so.. so how did it evolve?..
Proof that the Christian god cannot exist.
This is a revision and refinement of a post I made over a year ago but there are so many new members now that I felt it worth a revisit.
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.
Cris
The above isn't a Paradox because a Paradox can't have loopholes in it, it has to be a closed case, and it isn't a closed case.
Nonsense.
It's not nonsense, a Paradox is a closed loop.
par·a·dox
- a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.
- a seemingly absurd or self-contradictory statement that is or may be true: religious truths are often expressed in paradox
- a person or thing exhibiting apparently contradictory characteristics
- an opinion that conflicts with common belief
- That which is apparently, though not actually, inconsistent with or opposed to the known facts in any case.
- A statement that seems contradictory or absurd but is actually valid or true. According to one proverbial paradox, we must sometimes be cruel in order to be kind. Another form of paradox is a statement that truly is contradictory and yet follows logically from other statements that do not seem open to objection. If someone says, “I am lying,” for example, and we assume that his statement is true, it must be false. The paradox is that the statement “I am lying” is false if it is true.
Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paradox
Yes.. closed loops.. contradictory.. in maths combined with English...
If I have +1 I also must have -1
Therefore to have something I must have nothing.
+1 + -1 = 0
-1 + +1 = 0
A closed loop.
^ Not sure what this is supposed to mean..
It seems you are talking about a temporal paradox?
I don't think Cris is using that definition. He wrote: Paradox: Statements or events that have contradictory and inconsistent properties.
Which is an alternative definition of the word 'paradox'.
a self-contradictory and false proposition.
Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paradox
Oh right, I forgot.You forget that words are also mathematical formulas.
Oh right, I forgot.
Words are mathematical formulas..
Wrong.The above isn't a Paradox because a Paradox can't have loopholes in it, it has to be a closed case, and it isn't a closed case.
Chaotic has nothing to do with it.God can know all future events.
God can create man with free will (if he allows man to be chaotic)
God can allow man to be chaotic even if he knows the outcome of this chaos.
Wrong.
Chaotic has nothing to do with it.
So, any "explanation" as to why the paradox isn't a paradox?