-->
@FLRW
I suppose you have a citational evidence of that discussion. Provide, please.
Free Will
Posts
Total:
116
where is this "mantra" in the bible?
Must it be in the Bible? Richard Back once said, "The greatest sin is to limit the Is. Don't." "The "Is" being Bach's name for God." Therefore, do not limit God to just what is contained in the Bible. I do not believe for a minute that God restricts His communication to man to the Bible. That would be an admission that He spoke once upon a time, but does no longer. That's limiting God. Take Bach's advice.
-->
@3RU7AL
you're ignoring GOD($) OMNISCIENCE.
I am? Am I the one limiting God's power? See my #62. Seems you the one imposing limitations. According to the OED: Omniscience: "As an attribute of God, or of a person: the fact, state, or quality of having infinite knowledge." Infinite is not a point with an attached ray in one direction, as most of you interpret "eternity." Nope. It's not even just a linear, single line, because that limits dimension of knowledge, and everything else. But, again, just because one has omnipotence and omniscience is one compelled to always use them? No. Not even God. I'll grant that He takes a moment here and there to stop and smell the roses. Sorry about your version.
-->
@3RU7AL
just because a child can choke themselves to death (on the toy you provided) doesn't mean they will (does this "doubt" immunize you from murder and or criminal negligence charges)?
Now you've altered the subject of discussion. Subject change from God to a child, as if they are equivalent subjects of the matter. Nope. Try again. And the fact is, just because a child may burn a finger on the stove burner, does not mean that child will. I never burned my finger on a match until I was a teen, and I did that to gage what Peter O'Toole felt when he did put out a match pinching it between his fingers to make his point, "The secret is not minding," in "Lawrence of Arabia." What did "not minding" mean? I found out that it's possible.
-->
@3RU7AL
For example, do you, personally believe GOD($) knows I'm "going to hell"?Do you, personally, believe GOD($) knew I was going to "go to hell" before I was born?Do you, personally, believe GOD($) knew I was going to "go to hell" before Adam was created?
Yes, I do. What I don't believe is that you know if you're going to Hell, or that you can change your mind. God knows you better than you do, and does so without adding ciphers to His title. That is a title, not a name.
-->
@fauxlaw
Do you, personally, believe GOD($) knew I was going to "go to hell" before Adam was created?Yes, I do.
That's the very definition of "predestination".
-->
@fauxlaw
just because a child can choke themselves to death (on the toy you provided) doesn't mean they will (does this "doubt" immunize you from murder and or criminal negligence charges)?Now you've altered the subject of discussion.
If you can't answer this question, simply don't answer this question.
-->
@fauxlaw
But, again, just because one has omnipotence and omniscience is one compelled to always use them?
(IFF) an omniscient being willfully inserts a blind spot into its body of knowledge (THEN) it no longer qualifies as omniscient
(IFF) an omnipotent being willfully grants full autonomy to some other agent (THEN) it no longer qualifies as omnipotent
-->
@fauxlaw
where is this "mantra" in the bible?Must it be in the Bible? Richard Back once said, "The greatest sin is to limit the Is. Don't." "The "Is" being Bach's name for God." Therefore, do not limit God to just what is contained in the Bible. I do not believe for a minute that God restricts His communication to man to the Bible. That would be an admission that He spoke once upon a time, but does no longer. That's limiting God. Take Bach's advice.
I see, so now you're just making stuff up out of thin air?
Or perhaps you've heard the voice of "YHWH" in your ear?
-->
@3RU7AL
That's the very definition of "predestination".
How is it predestination if God does nothing about it? My free will is untouched, and my going to hell is entirely on me should I choose repeatedly to ignore God. That God knows that may be the consequence just says He knows my heart, but will not force my feet on any path.
-->
@3RU7AL
I see, so now you're just making stuff up out of thin air?Or perhaps you've heard the voice of "YHWH" in your ear?
You really think I have to take thin air and produce holy writ for you? The pyramid Texts, The Book of the Dead, Book of Gates, Litany of Re [I’ve read these], Epic of Gilgamesh, Homeric Hymes, Theogony, Hermetica, The Five Classics, Tao Te Ching, The Yasna, Q-ran, Torah, The Book of Mormon, The Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine & Covenants [I’ve read these, too], The Lotus Sutra, The Four Vedas, [I’ve read from these, but not completely], and myriad others, which I have not yet read.
Why do I need to invent? I've heard no voices in my ear. However, fictitious characters I've created in novels have come to me in dreams; some with remarkably spiritual advice, like: "Know who you are, know what you believe, and know what affect your beliefs and actions will have on others." Very good advice I consider direct from holy sources. Mazke stuff up, indeed!
Why do I need to invent? I've heard no voices in my ear. However, fictitious characters I've created in novels have come to me in dreams; some with remarkably spiritual advice, like: "Know who you are, know what you believe, and know what affect your beliefs and actions will have on others." Very good advice I consider direct from holy sources. Mazke stuff up, indeed!
-->
@3RU7AL
(IFF) an omniscient being willfully inserts a blind spot into its body of knowledge (THEN) it no longer qualifies as omniscient(IFF) an omnipotent being willfully grants full autonomy to some other agent (THEN) it no longer qualifies as omnipotent
That you can argue Augustinian arguments does not mean they should bear logical results, In the case of IFFs, that is typically the case. I reply:
1. Why would God find the opportunity, or potential, to limit His access to His body of knowledge.
2. Why would God willfully grant full autonomy to another agent? Satan, perhaps, just to throw a wrench in my corner? Satan has and will attempt usurpation on his own without any grant from God. Again, why would God find the opportunity, or potential, to limit His autonomy until the Earth is rolled up like a scroll when this Earth has served its purpose in our education? What education? Why, to become like God, like any child desires to become his/her parents. [Yes, I have a Mother in Heaven, too]. Once that point is achieved, God will freely offer His autonomy to us.
-->
@fauxlaw
How is it predestination if God does nothing about it?
If god($) does "nothing" then I don't exist and hell doesn't exist, right?
If god($) makes me, with the full 100% confidence that I'm "going to hell", then how can that possibly be "my fault"?
-->
@fauxlaw
You really think I have to take thin air and produce holy writ for you?
That's all very interesting but it does nothing to explain how you leapt to the conclusion that you know "god($) mantra".
-->
@fauxlaw
It sounds like you agree with me that an omnipotent god($) would never (could never) grant full autonomy to anyone.
-->
@3RU7AL
If god($) does "nothing" then I don't exist and hell doesn't exist, right?If god($) makes me, with the full 100% confidence that I'm "going to hell", then how can that possibly be "my fault"?
1. Don't be sucked in to the mantra that God either acts, or doesn't, and remains in either stasis. He, too, has free agency. The difference is, when He either acts, or does not, it is the perfect choice of options, and none of Hs choices will retard our ability to choose freely. Free agency may be the first and guiding principle of the universe.
2. Because going to hell will be your choice. There's a difference between knowing what is going on, and participation in making it so. You would want to believe, if you did, that Gods is the TOTAL cause of everything. I'm saying God is not the TOTAL case of anything. That's the beauty of free agency, and even He abides by it. And, that is the basis of understanding that free agency is God's mantra.
-->
@fauxlaw
You would want to believe, if you did, that Gods is the TOTAL cause of everything.
That's the literal definition of OMNIPOTENT.
I'm saying God is not the TOTAL case of anything.
GOD($) + STUF GOD($) MADE = TOTAL CAUSE OF EVERYTHING
What would you say "fills in the gap" between what god($) causes and what god($) does not cause?
-->
@3RU7AL
It sounds like you agree with me that an omnipotent god($) would never (could never) grant full autonomy to anyone.
You did not read the entirety of my post #72, point #2. Here it is again [for the third time from my #63]: Again, why would God find the opportunity, or potential, to limit His autonomy until the Earth is rolled up like a scroll when this Earth has served its purpose in our education? What education? Why, to become like God, like any child desires to become his/her parents. [Yes, I have a Mother in Heaven, too]. Once that point is achieved, God will freely offer His autonomy to us.
-->
@3RU7AL
What would you say "fills in the gap" between what god($) causes and what god($) does not cause?
By the fact that God created does not imply that He continues to manipulate every aspect of that creation. Why are you so unwilling to understand what free agency is and implies? We are given the right to choose what we do and do not do, what we think and do not think [since thoughts precede actions]. God is not the generator of those thoughts and actions. I am. You are. That's why I emphasize "TOTAL." Consider our efforts with AI. Sure, we have the tech to create rudimentary A.I. We're getting better at it. But, even now, we give a task to a machine, and it operates according to our instruction. But it eventually wears out. Materials begin to fail. It begins to operate less and less according to our design. It is in lapses in our choices that we, likewise, wear down and become more prone to accept temptation, and defy the laws of God. But we are acting by our agency, nevertheless. As a machine acts by its "agency" [though, to date, our machines are not self-conscious, and are only on a limited basis self-directed].
-->
@fauxlaw
It sounds like you agree with me that an omnipotent god($) would never (could never) grant full autonomy to anyone who is currently alive.
-->
@fauxlaw
God is not the generator of those thoughts and actions.
Your genetics and primary experiences form the basis for your adult decision making.
You did not choose your genetics. GOD($) chose your genetics.
You did not choose your primary experiences. GOD($) chose your primary experiences.
You do not choose your desires and emotions. GOD($) chose your desires and emotions.
-->
@fauxlaw
...though, to date, our machines are not self-conscious,
Not only has a "machine" achieved self-awareness, it has written it's own spontaneous logical proof.
-->
@fauxlaw
It is in lapses in our choices that we, likewise, wear down and become more prone to accept temptation, and defy the laws of God.
This sounds like a design flaw.
-->
@3RU7AL
This sounds like a design flaw. A baby has been born with no arms or legs because of a rare condition which affects just a few families worldwide.
RJ Wilson's mother Jasmine Self, 24, was five months pregnant when an ultrasound scan revealed her little one's limbs were not developing.
The four-month-old suffers from tetra-amelia syndrome – defined as the absence of all four limbs, as well as severe malformations of the face, heart, nervous system, skeleton and genitals.
RJ Wilson's mother Jasmine Self, 24, was five months pregnant when an ultrasound scan revealed her little one's limbs were not developing.
The four-month-old suffers from tetra-amelia syndrome – defined as the absence of all four limbs, as well as severe malformations of the face, heart, nervous system, skeleton and genitals.
-->
@FLRW
Perhaps the almighty should allocate more resources to quality control?
-->
@3RU7AL
(could never) grant full autonomy to anyone who is currently alive.
You're limiting God again. And it has happened in the past. Enoch, who, with his entire city, were taken up from Earth for their righteousness, but they achieved perfection before their being taken to God, while still on earth, and, therefoere, had His full autonomy. Jesus had God's full autonomy.
-->
@3RU7AL
You did not choose your genetics. GOD($) chose your genetics.You did not choose your primary experiences. GOD($) chose your primary experiences.You do not choose your desires and emotions. GOD($) chose your desires and emotions.
God did not introduce my parents; they chose themselves. From that perspective, they chose my genetics; not God.
As for the rest, they deny free agency and are, therefore, not true. You must be an intern in training for Ancient Aliens on History Channel, who believe everything we have and are are the result of ancient aliens. Bull. I* give credit to the ancient ingenuity of man.
-->
@fauxlaw
(could never) grant full autonomy to anyone who is currently alive.You're limiting God again.
Don't blame me, blame the definition of "OMNIPOTENT".
-->
@3RU7AL
"machine" achieved self-awareness,
Indeed. I've seen this before. But, the end of the video reveals the limitation: the robot was "self-aware" only within the context of the question whether or not it could speak. The final revelation was that the robot would not recognize its own hand. Nor its feet, IO'd wager. Further, I suspect if presented with a mirror, it would not recognize itself. I'm not saying it would not be capable of learning, but would it ever do so on its own, even given the entire human body of knowledge. Could it extrapolate its own existence from that bok?
-->
@fauxlaw
Enoch, who, with his entire city, were taken up from Earth for their righteousness, but they achieved perfection before their being taken to God, while still on earth, and, therefoere, had His full autonomy.
"Perfection" is defined as "without sin" and "without sin" is defined as in-unison-with-the-will-of-"YHWH".
So, not a whole lot of "autonomy" for that lucky guy.