Firstly, to say that this is a flaw in any belief in a god would be inaccurate. Calvinists have their bases covered in this area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism#Five_points_of_Calvinism If you don't feel like reading, let me summarize the point: They believe that in the beginning of time God predestined some to salvation, and some to eternal damnation. Predestination is not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those who are destined to Heaven or hell--see unconditional election-- So to say that this belief in one of the pillars of Calvinism (predestination) is an accurate one, is highly debatable. In my opinion it contradicts the belief in an all-merciful, benevolent god (choosing some for salvation and others damnation, ect.). But it really is not my place to say. However, it would not be an accurate statement to say that no religion/belief in an omnipotent god has their grounds covered in the area of predestination/freewill/an omniscient god. Now that the inaccuracy of your opening statement is cleared up, allow me to state the fact that the beliefs of Calvinism are not my own. (continuing now) Let me ask you this: How much more of a point do our live have if there is no god? You've conveniently left out any additional information on your own bias. If there is no God, where did we come from? (skipping the morality bit-- your answer was too much for me to reply to ) How did our universe come into being? Obviously, our universe was made the way it is through a series of events leading to the "Big Bang", but really, what started it? And don't try to answer this, it is rhetorical. The sad truth is that no one really knows for sure what started the Big Bang, we just know that it happened. Saying something "just happened" goes against the concept of all affects having a cause. In my opinion, this leads us to the conclusion of a greater entity. But really, what was he/she doing before he/she created the universe? We know that God has no beginning and no end, right? so how did he/she come into existence? As I rationalize, I come to the conclusion that some outside force somehow chose him/her to be the ultimate power in the universe. But if that is the case, where did the outside force come from? The question above is quite similar to the question you are posing. We can try and try to rationalize as much as possible, but as far as I can tell, there is no definite answer. You are missing the point, And it is quite understandable. Being brought up in a society in which everything has an answer, it is expected of you to come to the conclusion that there is no God, simply because it cannot be fully explained. This is where faith comes in. Calling faith a cop-out is quite ignorant. Faith is the foundation of most belief systems. Let me put it simply, you cannot ask the religious to explain a highly controversial subject to you while also taking the foundation of their beliefs out of the equation. It's like telling a repair man to make your fridge run, but also demand that he do it with the fridge unplugged (terrible example, I know). It just doesn't make sense. Let me try to explain faith to you the best I can (which is still rather terribly): On this planet, it is a fact that a baby will not understand much of anything their parents are doing, or why, or how they are doing it. If they did, they would be considered to have the intellectual capacity of an adult (correct me if im wrong). Likewise, we humans will understand little of anything God does, or why, or how he is doing it. If we did, we would be considered to have the same intellectual capacity of a god. If God is only as smart as us (assuming he exists), then he is obviously not omniscient. The way I see it, faith is the only answer -- we must trust that God is good, and let him handle the rest (even if it means we have no idea what is going on) I know it may be hard to rationalize, but I don't know how to explain it any other way. edit: I think the word you are looking for is omniscient btw
im no longer a religious person ... i was until around 18 like i said i was as involved as an 18 year old can be... but doesnt change the fact that im not now at nearly 22 and doesnt mean that i can debate the topic nor the fact that i still have personal interest in the topic
Do you realise that all you have done here is quoted my opening statement, quoted something entirely irrelevant (and from a Wiki article, no less) about predestined salvation, and called it evidence of my statement's inaccuracy? Did you read my post, or were you simply altogether too fast to mount that high horse and defend your invisible sky giant? Yes, I'm being pretty snappy here. I'll be much more inclined to be polite when you come back with an argument that makes sense. What in the name of whatever fictional deity you believe in are you talking about? This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. You've gone off on an archtypically pro-religious "well if God doesn't exist then how come..." rant. I don't know if you're purpously trying to draw away from the topic at hand because you don't have an answer or if you're just genuinely incapable of reading my question and giving a straight answer. So now, at least, we get down to your supposed answer to my question, several entirely pointless paragraphs into your post, and I must say, even given your shallow attempts at scraping the bottom of what qualifies as pseudointellectualism, I'm remarkably dissapointed. Your answer is basically saying "You asked a rational question and expected a rational answer from religious people? Pfft. Good luck with that, the only answer you're gonna get is 'cuz god can do watevr he want'". If you wanted to tell me that most people of God will not be able to give me a satisfying rational explanation for this, it was entirely unnecessary and completely too late. What I am searching for is either a religious person who can give me a rational answer or opinions on the topic, such as the opinion given by Dark earlier. I most certainly do not need someone to remind me that most religious debates lack a rational foundation.
Wow. My opening paragraph was hardly defending any invisible sky giant. All I did was state a fact that YOUR opening statement blatantly disagrees with. Did you even read my opening lines? If so, can you please point out the parts where it is even remotely evident that I am defending my invisible sky giant. Honestly, I would like to know. http://www.calvinistcorner.com/tulip.htm http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/dabney/5points.htm http://www.prca.org/fivepoints/index.html firstly, *archetypally *purposely Once again, you've completely misunderstood the point almost entirely. The only thing I did in that part of my post was point out another matter of the belief in an almighty giant in the sky that doesn't make sense. I'm really not sure how you did not make the connection, as I had very plainly pointed out In my opening statement, I believe I gave you a branch of religious people who give an entirely rational answer to your question. I wonder if the wiki link somehow hindered your comprehensive capacity? Now as stated before, I am no Calvinist. I was simply stating that the Calvinists have an answer for the question that you implied has no answer. Now let me try to explain (again) what I believe the best that I can: oh yeah, I think I covered this... let me check... oh, here we go: Though it be a terrible analogy, it gets the point across. If we understood everything God is up to, then why call him a God? a friend of mine once said : "The day I stop questioning is the day I stop believing" (tell me if you need that one explained) If you'd like to put it that way, then sure. that is what I am saying. Now as much as you may think this proves your point, you need to understand that faith is not a rational thing. The fact of the matter is that it doesn't make sense. That is where the leap of faith comes in. I am really not trying to convert you, so it is ok if you are unhappy with the answer. I am sorry if some of this didn't make sense, simply quote the parts that you don't understand, and I can explain them-- right now i am a bit groggy.
Ignoring for a moment the supposed debate about wether or not you're defending anyone, your citation still has nothing to do with my initial question. I asked how if God can see what we will do in the future if we have free will. You posted that people's fates in their afterlives are predetermined. This has nothing to do with anything I asked. I did not ask if God knew where people would be after they die. Kindly, re-read my question and do feel entirely free to present an answer relevent to the debate when you see fit. Grammar/spelling nazism is always the last defense of a person with no legs left to stand on. I'm sure you'll find many errors in my posts, far more than those two alone. I don't spellcheck them and rarely bother to proofread. Last time I checked, I was debating the relevence of a post by a person that can't seem to prevent themselves from jabbering away into irrelevent topics on a Neopets forum with no intention of submitting my posts for grading by an English tutor. I'll let you know when I consider your arguments worth the time it would take to spellcheck my posts. Not yet. Once again I'm going to say; supposing you do are not defending any "God", as you claim, the texts you quoted are still entirely irrelevent to my question. They do not answer it. They are not even on the same topic. I did not imply it had no answer. I implied it may be remarkably difficult to answer, but the answer you've given me, ragarding the Calvinists (who I might point out, are certainly not the only sect that believes in a predetermined fate for the afterlife) is not related to what I asked. Yes yes yes, I know what you're trying to say. I don't know if you genuinely do not understand what I am asking for or if you're just failing to thouroughly read what I'm writing. I am aware that the very requirement of faith transcends logic. You are not telling me anything I don't know. What I am asking for is that someone, in spite of this, present me with an attempt at a logical argument anyway. Let me summarise before I finish: I asked for a rational answer, implying that there may not be one. You presented me with a "rational answer" that had nothing to do with the question I asked, then told me that there probably isn't a rational answer. It took you two remarkably long posts to give me information that had nothing to do with the topic and to tell me something I already knew. In any case, I don't think this argument is going to be resolved here and we're both becoming noticably less civil about it. I have no desire for either of us to be banned from this forum, so it is probably best that we wrap this up and agree to disagree before it develops into a flame war.
I really don't see how you fail to see the relevance in the question I am posing to the one you asked to begin with. But like you said, let's agree to disagree. I do want to take this opportunity to relate a little theory of mine. While I still believe that the answer to your question cannot be fully explained in a way that we can understand, the following presents a possible explanation (in my opinion). It is still kind of sketchy, so I am sorry if I explain it badly. I will do my best, and perhaps revise it later: Think of a dice expert throwing a die. Because he knows the physical properties of the die so very intimately, he knows that that if the die lands on a certain corner or side it will roll a certain way causing the die to land on a certain number. Likewise, God, being our creator, knows our personalities and thought-processes so very intimately that he knows exactly what will pop into our heads when we see a leaf falling, and what action that may make us want to take and the thought- process behind that action. But just because he knows all of that, does not mean he is controlling all of that. Now if it doesn't make sense to you, I am genuinely asking you to tell me (in a civil manner) so I can try and reexplain. I am kinda sick right now and my head is not very clear.
This is a far better argument in favour of a God that can predict our actions while not interfering with free will, however it still begs the question; even with such intimate knowledge of all of our minds, such that our actions are known to him, is that really the same as being omnipotent?
I really don't mean to be an ass about this, but I'm pretty sure you are thinking of omniscient (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/omniscient) the first definition is: "–adjective 1. having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things." I would say that the theory cuts it. But it is debatable. Another theory (not mine) is that God could know everything if he wanted to, but chooses not to. idk, makes some sense I guess, but I really don't know. And the fact that I honestly don't know is where my little faith rant came from, just FYI. I really don't know the answer, but I have to trust that he is just and leave it at that.
No no, I mean omnipotent. Omniscient is related to knowledge, whereas omnipotent is basically being of infinite power, ecompassing omniscient. God is supposedly all powerful, but if he can't simply know all there is to know, he's not omniscient, and by that extension, not omnipotent, either. If he's not omnipotent, why call him god?
I see your train of thought, but still my post (directly above yours) remains valid. I'm not saying my theory is correct, but it is an option: If God knows everything that we will do only because he knows the way we're wired so intimately, that does not take away from the fact that he stills knows everything we will do, making him omniscient in that area. Other areas of his "all-knowingness" are a different topic, but going under the assumption that he remains omniscient in all other areas, this makes him a candidate for omnipotent consideration.
Quite so, but such a feat isn't beyond the realm of human possibility, either. While we couldn't possibly predict everyone's actions, it's not unlikely that someone could know someone else well enough to accurately predict all of their actions, which detracts from a claim of god's omnipotence.
Even our best friends surprise us sometimes. And what about secret sins? (religious reference, i know) there are things that people will not even tell to the best of friends because of a fear of rejection. Also, you need to remember that being omniscient means knowing all things, not just ours future actions, but also future thoughts and ideas. I would like to see a single human know another human so well that they can predict every thought and action that this person will experience for the rest of their natural life. My theory sets God far above any sort of human mental capacity. The fact that humans can preform this action to a much much much (x infinity) lesser extent does not disprove his omnipotence. The Bible states that we are made in his image, so it is expected of us to share in some of his abilities no matter how much less we are capable of.
I suppose you're right in that, however, it should also be noted that in for for there to be no pre-determination of events, that even God must sometimes be wrong in his prediction of our actions and thoughts.
That's actually wrong. In the Bible, when God talks to Abraham, he foresees that the jewish people will be enslaved by the egyptians for 400 years. And when God was trying to get the Israelites OUT of egypt, the paroh actually wanted to let them go after the 5th...I dunno how you guys call it in english... but you know...the 5th..."Strike"? But god "Toughened his Heart" so that he WOULD NOT release the Israelites, because God wanted to beat him up some more. So god HAS predicted the future before, AND controlled other people's actions. There are other occasions in which God predicts the future...but I forget them. He is also described as "All Knowing", therefore he knows EVERYTHING of the past, present, and future.
well for me i would say that its a different story for Jeremiah and prophets and such as that is a planed event by god... so for a planed event theirs a reason there there and the reason is to deliver a message so to me thats a complete different game as there not the "normal" person..im talking about events that god does interfere.. like the sending of his son he knew his future... and all knowing doesn't mean can tel the future
Dude I did not understand a word you just said Could you rephrase it please? :3 If you're gonna talk about Jesus...well...that's a different thing, I have been talking about Judaism...Christians may have a different perception of "God". And I'm not sure what is the story with Jeremiah you are reffering to...could you please explain what story you mean? And regardless of what's in that story...I have given you proof that he DOES see the future and DOES interfere with human actions (in my last post about egypt).
not really in the mood to expan on that atm lol... nut Jewish god and Christan god are same one the biggest diff in the 2 is jews do not believe in Jesus... ok im going to tell one story on how we know god cant tell the future is your religious... why did he not see adam and eve eating the forbidden fruit? the Kane killing his first son story is another example i have more but they take allot of explaining lol
I too disagree with the fact that there is a "god" but I do agree that somehow, somewhere, there are things that us humans cannot possibly imagine to be possible. I am about 95% sure that the government has kept things from civilization for our minds to maintain the physical state theyve been in throughout the past. I obviously cannot explain it nor can anyone on Earth because its just simply unexplainable! No one can know for sure...
Dude...the only thing worse than religion...is people who are sure of GOVERMENT CONSPIRACIES. Not gonna talk about that topic xD. And Dark. What you have said in NO way proves ANYTHING. He forsaw the Adam and Eve eating the apple, and he forsaw the murder. But it's not his JOB to control how humans act. Like I said in my first post. We each make our own choices, based on our personality, and our experiences. God just knows what the end would be. God isn't some mighty figure that stops any attempt on murder. He has to let humans be humans. There are only a handful of times that God actually controls a human being, and each time has it's own special purpose. The fact that he didn't stop Cain and Able (No idea how to type their names in english) doesn't mean ANYTHING.