Atheists, smarter than religious people

real again misses this simple logic test; if something is known before it happens, it's preordained.

0 Replies

Are you sure CI?

If something is known before it happens it is predicted. But not neccesarily preordained...(?)

But since everything that will happen are consequences of what is happening now, isn't everything preordained in a way?

That is not to say that there is some supreme being to which we attribute human qualities and concepts planning it all out in advance. That's just a childish notion.

0 Replies

I disagree; predictions are often wrong, whereas preordained means it's predetermined.

I can predict that we will have a sunny day tomorrow at 3PM or predict that our economy will be good for the rest of this year, but that doesn't mean it will be. If our weather was preordained, it will happen according to predetermination for no chance for error. If the economy can be preordained (by some god) without any mistake, that's what will happen, but that knowledge is not possible.

0 Replies

CI,

I think you and Chumly are a bit confused regarding the difference between foreknowledge (to know ahead of time) and preordination (to foreordain or to predestine).

They are not the same.

I knew (foreknew) Hillary would run for President.

But I didn't preordain (cause) it.

There is a huge difference between foreknowledge and preordination.

God knows what you will do, before you do it.

However, He gave you a free will, and thus you are responsible for your actions.

He did not preordain (predestinate) you to do what you have done or what you will do.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

CI,

I think you and Chumly are a bit confused regarding the difference between foreknowledge (to know ahead of time) and preordination (to foreordain or to predestine).

They are not the same.

I knew (foreknew) Hillary would run for President.

But I didn't preordain (cause) it.

There is a huge difference between foreknowledge and preordination.

God knows what you will do, before you do it.

However, He gave you a free will, and thus you are responsible for your actions.

He did not preordain (predestinate) you to do what you have done or what you will do.

utter nonsense, there is no "there" there.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

real life wrote:
CI,

I think you and Chumly are a bit confused regarding the difference between foreknowledge (to know ahead of time) and preordination (to foreordain or to predestine).

They are not the same.

I knew (foreknew) Hillary would run for President.

But I didn't preordain (cause) it.

There is a huge difference between foreknowledge and preordination.

God knows what you will do, before you do it.

However, He gave you a free will, and thus you are responsible for your actions.

He did not preordain (predestinate) you to do what you have done or what you will do.

utter nonsense, there is no "there" there.

Not sure which point you are taking issue with here. Perhaps you should be more specific.

Do you think foreknowledge and predestination (i.e. preordination or foreordination) are the same?

How do you explain that I foreknew that Hillary would run for President, but I did not predestine (preordain ) it?

------------------------

Or are you saying that a person is not responsible for his own actions?

We have built nearly all of our society on the notion that we have a free will and are responsible for our own actions, have we not?

0 Replies

This particular piece about the difference between preordination and foreknowledge seems perfectly clear and logical to me. As it has been posed by RL, set aside from the whole ponderous, never-ending debate between believers and non-believers, I don't understand the pigheaded refusal to concede the obvious.

0 Replies

Quote:

How do you explain that I foreknew that Hillary would run for President, but I did not predestine (preordain ) it?

A reasonable guess, also made by millions of other people. You didn't "foreknow" anything more than I "foreknow" that the sun will rise tomorrow morning.

0 Replies

Hey, real life wanna make some big coin? You supply the foreknowledge, and I won't have any trouble with the preordaining!

Here's what I suggest..you use your foreknowledge to provide exact closing prices of all the securities in the Wilshire 5000 one year hence. Then I'll gladly do the preordaining, which would in essence amount to the same thing. With the added benefit of making me a billionaire using derivatives such as puts and calls.

It will be a cinch, and I'll even let you in for a cut of the big money pie to support your Christian morality of helping the less apt.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

This particular piece about the difference between preordination and foreknowledge seems perfectly clear and logical to me.

In the same way that the difference between Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy must thus seems perfectly clear and logical to you.

0 Replies

If god is omniscient, then God knew from the beginning of creation exactly how every person would react in every situation. Each response is made by a brain that was configured by genetics and wired by experiences, all of which are the direct result of God's creation of life, the universe, and everything in one particular way instead of the infinite other ways in which he could have chosen.

Your response to any situation would be different if you had a different genetic makeup or had been influenced at any time by other people or events to make a different decision which would have changed the set of memories and thinking processes that influence future decisions, all of which God knew in advance.

If God had infinite scope in creation, knew the precise outcome of every design decision he made, knew that alternate designs would cause things to turn out differently, and had the power to do things otherwise, then everything that happens was indeed knowingly caused - and therefore preordained - by God.

0 Replies

Terry wrote:

If god is omniscient, then God knew from the beginning of creation exactly how every person would react in every situation. Each response is made by a brain that was configured by genetics and wired by experiences, all of which are the direct result of God's creation of life, the universe, and everything in one particular way instead of the infinite other ways in which he could have chosen.

Your response to any situation would be different if you had a different genetic makeup or had been influenced at any time by other people or events to make a different decision which would have changed the set of memories and thinking processes that influence future decisions, all of which God knew in advance.

If God had infinite scope in creation, knew the precise outcome of every design decision he made, knew that alternate designs would cause things to turn out differently, and had the power to do things otherwise, then everything that happens was indeed knowingly caused - and therefore preordained - by God.

You don't think God has the power to create a being that can choose on it's own, overriding genetic background and regardless of past experience?

Why could He not?

Even human societies, without taking God into account, are setup on the assumption that humans have free will and are therefore responsible for their own actions.

0 Replies

If God is omnipotent, he can do what he durn well pleases. And, if he pleases to screen from himself the 'inevitable' moral outcome of any or all of his intelligent creation, then he can durn well do so. (THAT IS the key to our free will.)

If, by omniscient, you mean he must know all these outcomes by necessity, then he is by choice not omniscient. (THAT would be predestination.)

It is a convenient dodge of the unbeliever to create a straw god having assailable attributes. The true God is perfect.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

It is a convenient dodge of the unbeliever to create a straw god having assailable attributes. The true God is perfect.

It seems a convenient arrogance of each believer, to assign to their own beliefs, the title of "True God", as though their beliefs were anything more than simply that.

0 Replies

I personally think that we have a limited amount of free will. But then I do not believe in an omniscient or omnipotent God. If I did, I could not logically believe in free will.

I cannot imagine why a perfect and omni-everything god could or would screen himself from knowing the consequences of his actions in creating such imperfect beings as we are. That is a convenient dodge of someone who believes in a logically impossible God.

0 Replies

Dodge ball, anyone?

Whatever we conclude, let it not be according to our personal desire for license or reward.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Dodge ball, anyone?

Whatever we conclude, let it not be according to our personal desire for license or reward.

Tell me what you want and I'll give you what you need Very Happy

0 Replies

Coffee would be nice. Tall Redeye with maybe a croissant. . .

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

If God is omnipotent, he can do what he durn well pleases. And, if he pleases to screen from himself the 'inevitable' moral outcome of any or all of his intelligent creation, then he can durn well do so. (THAT IS the key to our free will.)

If, by omniscient, you mean he must know all these outcomes by necessity, then he is by choice not omniscient. (THAT would be predestination.)

It is a convenient dodge of the unbeliever to create a straw god having assailable attributes. The true God is perfect.

The problem with your "logic", as you know full well I would assume, is that once this so-called "screening" has taken place god, cannot now know a specified outcome, so can not be certain of acting (as he must) in the most moral fashion, so he must un-screen himself in order to confirm he is acting in the most moral fashion, but according to you, he must then screen himself, but at that point he cannot confirm he is acting in the most moral fashion, so he must un-screen himself..........closed loop logical absurdity.

If your god is so-called "perfect", why even bother with your rationalization of so-called "screening"?

If your god is perfect, and he can do anything and everything, he would not need to screen himself.

It is a convenient dodge of the believer to create a straw god having unassailable attributes. The true God is idealized poodle droppings.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

neologist wrote:
Blah blah.
The problem with your "logic", as you know full well I would assume, is that once this so-called "screening" has taken place god, cannot now know a specified outcome, so can not be certain of acting (as he must) in the most moral fashion, so he must un-screen himself in order to confirm he is acting in the most moral fashion, but according to you, he must then screen himself, but at that point he cannot confirm he is acting in the most moral fashion, so he must un-screen himself.

If your god is so-called "perfect", why even bother with your rationalization of so-called "screening"?

If your god is perfect and he can do anything and everything he would not need to screen himself

It is a convenient dodge of the believer to create a straw god having unassailable attributes. The true God is idealized poodle droppings.

Since he is the final arbiter of what is moral, your objection makes no sense. He has the power to overcome or overthrow any efforts to defeat his purpose.

0 Replies

Atheists, smarter than religious people

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know