Forums → WEPR → [redirected]If God created all things
| 1849 | 255357 |
Here is something to get the brain going. It's been said that God created ALL things. Also it's been said that God is 100 precent pure/good. So God created man and it was said that because of man's sinful actions bad/evil things were created. But if God created ALL things then God created bad/evil things, not man. So by God creating bad/evil things this does not make him 100 precent pure/good.
- 1,849 Replies
Yea your good
So how about that John 10:10
*motions at Possum to post verse...NIV preferably*
Arguably angels are weaker beings than humans and are just as susceptible to sin as we are; the trinity is the only embodiment of God in existance.
So your saying angels are more likely to sin then humans?
Sure is difficult to argue against people who don't know the bible *cough* :P
I know what's in the Bible, it's just often what the religion or just the individual religious (if you prefer spiritual) person claims become far more convoluted and done to reconcile conflicting information. These claims seem to often change depending on the situation or person.
Here it is:The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.
So your saying angels are more likely to sin then humans?
Did you read what he posted? He said they're just as susceptible, not more so.
Did you read what he posted? He said they're just as susceptible, not more so.
He also said they were arguably weaker beings.
I've looked over these arguements and I've had this one plenty of times before, and it always leaves me with this question: If God, who is all knowing, put the Tree of Knowledge in Eden knowing full well what was going to happen with his creations, what was the point of even giving them a chance? He KNOWS they're going to do the wrong thing and he KNOWS he get's to punish them for it...isn't that sadistic? Furthermore, why go through such an elaborate plot just to have Jesus killed? Why not just...well not create. So if god set the ball rolling and he, knowing full well about the consequences, created man. Isn't he to blame?
If God, who is all knowing, put the Tree of Knowledge in Eden knowing full well what was going to happen with his creations, what was the point of even giving them a chance?
Good point. God's omniscience, in fact, is a problem for human free will in general. If God knows what we're about to do, how can we be free in doing what we do?
I'm no philosopher of religion (thankfully), but there are a number of great papers on this very topic. John Kvanvig actually came out recently with a paper that addresses this topic. The article is really heavy, but he essentially argues that God's knowledge can be infallible and complete, just not actualized. Whatever that means...
God's knowledge can be infallible and complete, just not actualized. Whatever that means...
It means that god does know all, but it cannot be conceived by humans. When you break it down this is an old arguement that is based in faith.
Good point. God's omniscience, in fact, is a problem for human free will in general. If God knows what we're about to do, how can we be free in doing what we do?
Just because someone knows what choice you're going to make doesn't mean you still aren't free to take it. If you had the choice between having 1 dollar and having 10 dollars, with no cost to you, you would undoubtedly choose the 10 dollars. Even though the person who offered you this choice knows you'll choose the 10 dollars, you are still free to make that decision on your own. You could just as easily pick the 1 dollar, you just won't.
And will you not try to answer any of the questions I have raised?
I've looked over these arguements and I've had this one plenty of times before, and it always leaves me with this question: If God, who is all knowing, put the Tree of Knowledge in Eden knowing full well what was going to happen with his creations, what was the point of even giving them a chance? He KNOWS they're going to do the wrong thing and he KNOWS he get's to punish them for it...isn't that sadistic? Furthermore, why go through such an elaborate plot just to have Jesus killed? Why not just...well not create. So if god set the ball rolling and he, knowing full well about the consequences, created man. Isn't he to blame?
Man needed to learn that he was not righteous enough. He needed to know that he wasn't good enough and that he needed a Savior. He needed to know that he needed God.
It means that god does know all, but it cannot be conceived by humans. When you break it down this is an old arguement that is based in faith.
Well, from my viewpoint is it a problem based in logic. We have to understand knowledge and propositions in such a way as to preserve free will. There are two clear sides of the fence on this debate - the libertarians who want to preserve free will and the ... other side (can't remember) who want to preserve God's omniscient. These two sides are classically viewed as mutually incompatible.
Just because someone knows what choice you're going to make doesn't mean you still aren't free to take it. If you had the choice between having 1 dollar and having 10 dollars, with no cost to you, you would undoubtedly choose the 10 dollars.
We're talking about logical necessity. From our point of view of knowledge, we can't know that someone will do a particular action because they can conceivably do otherwise. We may have very very good reasons for believing that S will do x, but it's not knowledge on any account. Your example also ignores the hard cases. God has to know which side of the bed I'm going to get out of. God has to know which sock I'm going to put on first. And God's knowledge must be infallible. So logically, it would seem that I cannot choose to do otherwise (since my actions are necessary under God's conception of the world).
Without a unique theory of truth-makers and propositional knowledge, free will and divine omniscience are logically incompatible.
Just because someone knows what choice you're going to make doesn't mean you still aren't free to take it. If you had the choice between having 1 dollar and having 10 dollars, with no cost to you, you would undoubtedly choose the 10 dollars. Even though the person who offered you this choice knows you'll choose the 10 dollars, you are still free to make that decision on your own. You could just as easily pick the 1 dollar, you just won't.
Actually they wouldn't know the person being offered would take the $10. It's just the most likely outcome.
However applying this to wolfs question, it would seem wolf is correct. God knows (or at least sees this is the most likely out come) they will do something wrong and will punish them for it.
Man needed to learn that he was not righteous enough. He needed to know that he wasn't good enough and that he needed a Savior. He needed to know that he needed God.
Just like how those battered wives need to be beat to know there place.
Man needed to learn that he was not righteous enough. He needed to know that he wasn't good enough and that he needed a Savior. He needed to know that he needed God.
A frail arguement. You're also ignoring a huge flaw in this reasoning. God created suffering just so that man would follow god. In essence all god did was put man on earth to be his pets.
Thread is locked!