Proof that the Christian god cannot exist
- Thread starter Cris
- Start date
I'm not going to agree with that, because I know by now how you will turn this around.
That's the only answer I can see.
And, as you probably guessed, it comes back to being an illusion.
I.e. if we have the illusion of (free) will we can claim that we do have it, regardless of whether we do or not have an actual "say" in the matter.
In which case the paradox is "solved" and I'm gone...
Actually Dywyddyr is arguing against the different usage of Omniscience.
There are 3 that I can think of..
1/ Omniscience... To Know Everything without explanation.
2/ Omniscience... To work out everything from Cause, and Effect.
3/ Omniscience... a result of Omnipresence that you know everything from seeing the future.
Which create 3 different arguments...
1/ If Omniscience is accepted with no explanation then it is not known that God uses it before Free Will occurs, because that would be an explanation. So you have to allow Free Will with no explanation.
2/ If Omniscience is to work things out from Cause, and Effect, then the opening post only needs to be a single line. Once you mention Cause and Effect Free Will cannot occur.
3/ My version that Omnipresence creates Omniscience allows Free Will, and I always thought that this is the version that Christians use.
There are 3 that I can think of..
1/ Omniscience... To Know Everything without explanation.
2/ Omniscience... To work out everything from Cause, and Effect.
3/ Omniscience... a result of Omnipresence that you know everything from seeing the future.
Which create 3 different arguments...
1/ If Omniscience is accepted with no explanation then it is not known that God uses it before Free Will occurs, because that would be an explanation. So you have to allow Free Will with no explanation.
2/ If Omniscience is to work things out from Cause, and Effect, then the opening post only needs to be a single line. Once you mention Cause and Effect Free Will cannot occur.
3/ My version that Omnipresence creates Omniscience allows Free Will, and I always thought that this is the version that Christians use.
Omniscience and free will are not mutually exclusive, since it is through free will that aspects of omniscience will be expressed in reality. For example, under natural laws, metallic aluminum would not form from aluminum oxide at ambient conditions. You will not find metallic aluminum in nature if oxygen is present. However, metallic aluminum does exist within culture, but takes will power to be made manifest. This required the invention of electricity and an electrochemical process apart from the natural world.
Omniscience would know making metallic aluminum was possible, but under natural laws it would never become manifest; natural cause and effect or random. To be made manifest in reality, will require human will power. Without will power, this aspect of omniscience would be only speculative theory and not reality. Will power evolved to make omniscience manifest in reality.
The human imagination can imagine anything, but it is through will power that these things can become manifest. Will power is not just about making omniscience manifest, it can also be used for foot dragging so omniscience can't be made manifest, therefore it appears not to exist.
If one could fight and foot drag against making metallic aluminum then this aspect of omniscience could be perpetuated as pure speculation. This orientation will use will to make omniscience inversely related to will power. But that too is part of omniscience becoming manifest.
Omniscience would know making metallic aluminum was possible, but under natural laws it would never become manifest; natural cause and effect or random. To be made manifest in reality, will require human will power. Without will power, this aspect of omniscience would be only speculative theory and not reality. Will power evolved to make omniscience manifest in reality.
The human imagination can imagine anything, but it is through will power that these things can become manifest. Will power is not just about making omniscience manifest, it can also be used for foot dragging so omniscience can't be made manifest, therefore it appears not to exist.
If one could fight and foot drag against making metallic aluminum then this aspect of omniscience could be perpetuated as pure speculation. This orientation will use will to make omniscience inversely related to will power. But that too is part of omniscience becoming manifest.
You are using the Cause, and effect version. The aluminium didn't jump out of the way of the scientists, and decide to avoid the experiment. With God we are talking about him knowing that you will eat beans tomorrow, or the Lotto numbers. Things which Cause, and effect have other choices. That's why you have to include Omnipresence.
That's the only answer I can see.
And, as you probably guessed, it comes back to being an illusion.
I.e. if we have the illusion of (free) will we can claim that we do have it, regardless of whether we do or not have an actual "say" in the matter.
In which case the paradox is "solved" and I'm gone...
Still arguing from a category mistake.
Unsupported claim.
Then you'll either have to explain it better or point me towards some books.
It isn't.
It depends on what you mean by free will. Signal appears to have defined it as "having the belief that we have a choice".
But, one more time for the simple minded:
If someone knows what is to be then how can there be anything other than that?
If I know you will pick how is it possible to pick anything else?
If you must pick A how was it your "choice"?
Yet to be shown.
kx000
Valued Senior Member
Yes, I will chose to leave the internet in 5 minutes.
Ok, try less insults. God sees all the options, and he knows all the players, are you with me so far? So before the options are even on the table God knows them all. Now, I will choose option A, and God knows this well before hand, but there is still a option b c d and e. Just because I will not choose them, and God knows that I will not choose them that does not mean they are not there.
I don't have to pick option A, but it is my destiny to do so. Have you ever heard the phrase "there is a reason we play the game?"
Just did.
Bascialy. I have many choices, but God knows what I will choose. In my mind I made the choice, but to God it is what was long written down. Honestly, I don't know. Just tell me if my point on this is not clear and I will refine it.
kx000
Valued Senior Member
Foreknowledge is knowledge of something before it happens, but it still has to happen to be considered knowledge, there is a reason we play the game.
Supposition.
Um, wrong. If god knows, infallibly, that you will choose A can you choose anything else? Can you make god wrong?
I assume your answer will be "No". Therefore you are stuck with choosing A, regardless of what you thought at the time. You CANNOT choose anything else: therefore it's not a choice. You were destined to pick A.
Of course you HAVE to, otherwise god was wrong.
Which has what to do with the argument?
Nope, you waffled around it.
You just made my point for me: in your mind it was a choice. In reality it wasn't, and never could be. All you had was the illusion of choice.
Why are we back to this?.. there is no foreknowledge in 2 versions of Omniscience. Only 1 version has foreknowledge. Cause, and Effect, but that version shouldn't work.
That's incorrect, otherwise it wouldn't be omniscience.
Utterly wrong.
And back to specious nonsense...
Yes it would. Even Wikipedia mentions the time loop, so it is Omniscience. And a time loop isn't foreknowledge. You have to go to the future which is future knowledge.
Pardon?
If it's omniscience how can there NOT be foreknowledge?
I've lost the Wiki reference, could you give it again please?