Page 38 of 49 FirstFirst ... 28363738394048 ... LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 490

Thread: Does an Omniscient Creator Lead to Fatalism?

  1. #371
    tWebber Adrift's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,664
    Amen (Given)
    6213
    Amen (Received)
    5994
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Oh but you do bother yourself with me and my arguments Sparko, it's just that your refutations are always shot down wherein your mocking and dismissing of me begins. Adrift didn't say anything, Adrift posted a link, a link btw which had nothing to do with your video tape recording argument. Btw, isn't there a rule against debate by web link?
    Jim, this is the second time you've attempted to out me for debating by web link in this thread. Nowhere in my post did I debate by web link. I replied in a perfectly standard and acceptable fashion according to Tweb's long standing rules. You've posted on the forum long enough now that you should know this.

    My intention was to help you gain understanding on an admittedly complicated topic. You're proving once again that you're not really interested in these topics, but in how you can "win the argument". I'm not in the slightest bit interested in that sort of discussion. If you want the title "winner of the thread", you have my blessing.

  2. Amen Sparko amen'd this post.
  3. #372
    Caught in the Matrix
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,744
    Amen (Given)
    1018
    Amen (Received)
    1122
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrift View Post
    Jim, this is the second time you've attempted to out me for debating by web link in this thread. Nowhere in my post did I debate by web link. I replied in a perfectly standard and acceptable fashion according to Tweb's long standing rules. You've posted on the forum long enough now that you should know this.

    My intention was to help you gain understanding on an admittedly complicated topic. You're proving once again that you're not really interested in these topics, but in how you can "win the argument". I'm not in the slightest bit interested in that sort of discussion. If you want the title "winner of the thread", you have my blessing.
    You're so full of it Adrift. "My intention was to help you gain understanding" . I challenged you to refute my argument, not to help me understand something I probably understand better than you do. If that's how you're refuting my argument, then you are debating by web link. So either refute the argument I made, with your own argument, in your own words, like you said you could, or don't bud in. Linking to web sites doesn't mean you know what the heck they mean.

  4. #373
    tWebber Chrawnus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,002
    Amen (Given)
    4551
    Amen (Received)
    2860
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    not to help me understand something I probably understand better than you do.

  5. #374
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,668
    Amen (Given)
    3427
    Amen (Received)
    17976
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Oh but you do bother yourself with me and my arguments Sparko, it's just that your refutations are always shot down wherein your mocking and dismissing of me begins. Adrift didn't say anything, Adrift posted a link, a link btw which had nothing to do with your video tape recording argument. Btw, isn't there a rule against debate by web link?
    He didn't argue by weblink. He quoted a source to give you more information. If you claim you want to have a serious debate then you should be interested in the other side's view to see if it has merit. But you aren't. All you care about is burning straw men. So all you get is mockery in return from most people.
    Last edited by Sparko; 02-02-2018 at 01:14 PM.

  6. Amen Chrawnus amen'd this post.
  7. #375
    Must...have...caffeine One Bad Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Inside the beltway
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,657
    Amen (Given)
    5010
    Amen (Received)
    9155
    Sorry, got too busy to look at this for a bit.
    Quote Originally Posted by lao tzu View Post
    The decision to view Paul's writings as inspired has been subject to church authority from their earliest adoption. The church made that decision and the church can reverse that decision, though clearly not without cost.

    Some reversals are easier than others.
    Reversals become more and more difficult with the passing of time. I'm also not aware of any reversals of positions in my tradition which were generally accepted by the church at large (Arianism tried, and failed, to overcome its defeat at Nicaea despite imperial sanction; similarly, iconoclasm failed to reverse earlier acceptance of icons despite imperial support).
    A tranche of Paul's letters, including the pastorals, has always been viewed with suspicion within and without the church
    I don't think this statement is even close to historically tenable. Every early list of received writings I can find (see Origen's list, several lists here, synopses here) includes at least 13 epistles to Paul (Hebrews is also often included, though Pauline authorship is disputed). The only figure in the early church who appears to have rejected some of Paul's letters was Marcion, and he was rejected as a heretic. According to the Wiki article, authorship of the Pastorals was not disputed until the 19th century. If that is correct, then they've been accepted as Pauline for nearly all of church history by all except a couple heretical groups.
    Last edited by One Bad Pig; 02-06-2018 at 03:56 PM.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio

    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

  8. #376
    tWebber 37818's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    So. California
    Faith
    Nontraditional Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,733
    Amen (Given)
    793
    Amen (Received)
    421
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    That god is infinite and eternal is not an issue that effects my argument, so not sure why you mention it.
    God is omniscient because He is infinite and eternal. A finite and temporal entity cannot be omniscient without access to the infinite and eternal.
    . . . the Gospel of Christ, for it is [the] power of God to salvation to every [one] believing, . . . -- Romans 1:16.

    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1.

  9. #377
    Must...have...caffeine One Bad Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Inside the beltway
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,657
    Amen (Given)
    5010
    Amen (Received)
    9155
    Quote Originally Posted by lao tzu View Post
    This is a question of causality, not blame. The unintended consequences of a creator are still its creations. I created a mess this morning. It wasn't the plan, but it was certainly my mess. I caused it.

    Intent is material if we're interested in judging the creation, and by implication, the creator, but I don't think we were going there. The question of whether a god I don't believe in created humans destined for a hell that I'm quite sure doesn't exist is purely academic for me. This is primarily a discussion of whether we can claim free will for the creations of an omniscient deity.
    Well, smarter men than I rather disagree.

    Philosopher David Bentley Hart has this to say about the word commonly translated "predestined":

    Source: The New Testament: A Translation, p. 552-3[/cite


    The... verb προορίζωειν, which has been traditionally - as a result of the Vulgate Latin translation - been rendered as "to predestine." This is simply incorrect (though some inferior lexica over the years, taking their lead from traditional theological usage in the West, have incorporated it in their definitions of the verb). The word ὁρίζωειν (whence our word "horizon") means "to demarcate," "delineate," "to mark out as a boundary," "to distinguish," "to sort," "to define," "to assign," "to plan out," "to make determinate," or "to appoint"; and προ-ὁρίζωειν is simply to do this in advance. It certainly possesses none of the grim, ghastly magnificence of the late Augustinian concept of "predestination": an entirely irresistible predetermining causal force, not based on divine foreknowledge but rather logically prior to everything it ordains, by which God infallibly destines only a very few to salvation and thereby infallibly consigns the vast majority of humanity to unending torment. Thus, in two of the six instances of the verb's use in the New Testament (Romans 8:29-30), Paul - blissfully innocent of later theological developments and anxieties - explicitly treats this divine "pre-demarcation" as consequent upon divine foreknowledge, and does so without any qualification or noticeable pangs of theological conscience. (1 Peter 1:1-2, more concisely, says the same thing.) Of the very few instances of the verb or its cognate noun προορισμός in Greek literature before the New Testament (I am aware of only two), it carries no connotation of predestination. More tellingly, none of the Greek-speaking Church Fathers ever read the word as having such a connotation, or even seemed to suspect that such a reading was a possibility. The Augustinian understanding of "predestination," for all its epochal significance for later Western Christian thought, is a late fourth-century theological innovation, the inadvertent invention of a Paul who never existed, a theological accident prompted by a defective Latin translation and the temperamental idiosyncrasies of a single sullen genius (with at times a singularly dismal understanding of the "good news"). No matter what one's theology, the traditional rendering is simply insupportable. I have therefore translated the verb, with bland literality, as "to mark out in advance."

    © Copyright Original Source



    He also casts some serious shade on the notion of eternal conscious torment, noting that αἰώνιος never has "eternal" as its root meaning, but can connote that when predicated of, i.e., God; the text will rather more easily bear the possibility of an indefinite period of torment which will either end in annihilation or a purifying of the tormented one resulting in that one being made acceptable to God. Ibid., 537-43.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio

    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

  10. #378
    Caught in the Matrix
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,744
    Amen (Given)
    1018
    Amen (Received)
    1122
    Quote Originally Posted by 37818 View Post
    God is omniscient because He is infinite and eternal. A finite and temporal entity cannot be omniscient without access to the infinite and eternal.
    Okay, did someone ask?

  11. Amen Tassman amen'd this post.
  12. #379
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    8,103
    Amen (Given)
    2034
    Amen (Received)
    1397
    Quote Originally Posted by 37818 View Post
    God is omniscient because He is infinite and eternal. A finite and temporal entity cannot be omniscient without access to the infinite and eternal.
    God being "omniscient" is an unsubstantiated claim. And you support this "unsubstantiated claim" by the bald assertion that therefore God needs to be "infinite and eternal", but NONE of these claims is supported. They are faith-based beliefs, nothing more.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  13. #380
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Faith
    DIY
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    33
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by mythas View Post
    I'll start with two assumptions that I think most Christians can agree with.

    1. God is Omniscient.He is all knowing of all things through all time. He is able to see ever chain of cause and effect through to its end.
    2. God created the universe. My point doesn't depend on the mechanism of creation simply that God initiated it.

    I am really struggling to resolve this idea in my head, and have been praying that I will come to peace with it, but I just can't let go of it.
    I suppose it would depend on God's amount of interference in its creation.

    If god made the Universe, shake and baked it, zipped it up and put it in the fridge, then ignored it, we would likely be pretty Free, bound by the perimeters of Existence.

    If God interfered, it would heavily imply it wanted a certain outcome because in being omniscient, it would know the outcome before interfering.

    Unless an omniscient entity is capable of surprising itself. If an omniscient entity could 'turn off' its omniscience(which why would it, unless its a burden-which would raise questions about its omnipotence) then that implies a triviality to our creation.

  14. Amen Tassman amen'd this post.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •