Predestination is an act of the God of Abraham

You misunderstand. They had no free will because God foresaw that they would eat the fruit even before he created the universe, and by creating it, they had no choice but to eat the fruit.

 

A description of something (regardless of what the thing is ... be it a god or a tomato) is not the something that is being described. Of course the Bible offers a description of God. But is that description God? No. It is just words used to describe God.

Experiment: Take a piece of paper; write upon it the description of a baseball. Now attempt to use that piece of paper, with the words describing a baseball written upon it, as a real baseball. Does it work? Does it function like a real baseball?

Science has not been able to prove that God does not exist, and Christians and other Theists have not been able to prove that God or gods do exist. You can experience God by using the methods and instructions given in the Bible and other holy texts.

That is your belief. That belief of yours has no impact on my belief. Does Hell exist? Does salvation exist? As for the individual that has been raped being required to marry the assailant ... well, the assailant did do something that is conceivably a violation of moral standards, so the assailant will have to care for and provide for that victim as a means of discharging the debt that the assailant placed him/her self in by the wrongful conduct.

Then you admit that omniscience is only a partial description of God?

But does omniscience predate God? Remember, omniscience as used in the Bible references an aspect of God. Jesus, the founder of Christianity, does not claim to be omniscient. Jesus does not claim to be omnipotent. So the teachings of Jesus also do not teach His followers that He or they are omnipotent or omniscient. Jesus accredits all power, glory, and honor and omniscience to the rightful holder which is God the Father.

 

No (*)(*)(*)(*)ing (*)(*)(*)(*). If you think that this is a counter to any of my points then you have less than a kindergartener level of understand of Philosophy.

Science does not prove negatives. The burden lies with the one making the positive claim.

Then no one should assume your claims to be true and they should have no bearing on government, education, etc. You want legitimacy? Provide proof.

My senses are all natural. They are only capable of perceiving and interacting with natural things. It is impossible to experience the supernatural without it becoming part of nature and therefore observable and testable.

I don't believe it does.

I don't believe it is necessary.

It's immoral. Forcing marriage of a rape victim to her attacker (where he will be able to continue his rapes) is (*)(*)(*)(*)ing wrong. And if you can't see that, you are as immoral as your God.

Duh. It's also the only aspect that applies to this thread.

So Jesus wasn't God?

So Jesus wasn't God?

So Jesus wasn't God?

So Jesus wasn't God?

Are you a dualist or a Gnostic? Maybe an Arian? They rejected Jesus's divinity also.

 

You misundertood, yourself. God knowing what would happen does not actually mean he forced it. There is a difference between pre-destination and omnificence.

I personally do not beleive that god is omnificent. If he is, then that would mean that he created lucifer, knowing full well all evils that lucifer would commit. A 100% benelovent being would be unable to knowingly create an evil being. So, it would mean that god is either not completely good, which would make since since he commonly called for the murder of innocents in the old testament, or that he is not truly omnificent.

 

If God knows what will happen with our universe (including all of the evil and suffering) before creating, and still chooses to create it, then God forced the future he foresaw to come to pass.

You are right in your rejection of omniscience. It's a docrine that leads to God being evil.

 

So I take it you a Christian and a Calvinist

 

There is no empirical evidence for imaginary things like omniscience, or predestination, or God.

Nope.

There is no empirical evidence for imaginary things like omniscience, or predestination, or God.

Or not.

 

The same is true if one accepts the existence of God "then you do not know"

The bottom line is that no one knows if there is a God or whether or not that God, if one exists, created the world in such a way as to include predestination.

 

That is the point....a truly 100% good being can not knowingly cause evil.....So god is either partly evil himself, or he is not omnificent. If he is no omnificent then he has no control over what comes to pass.

 

Not true. Folks who deny God are no more or less qualified than those who accept God to comment on the subject of predestination in relation to the concept of a God.

and no one is qualified to comment on God period.

 

Just an Apatheist follower of Confucius and Buddha debating philosophy.

 

Seemingly, you would have less than a kindergartener level of comprehension of the English language.

You are right. Science does not prove negatives. Science can only affirm or deny the various theories. But as for 'proof' science offers none. See here:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...sconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof

And you want to declare proof within the field of science, then provide proof.

"Impossible"? Says you? So little you KNOW about the supernatural. Yet so much you presume about the supernatural. Yet you deny the existence of the supernatural by deny the existence of God which is Super Natural.

Another denial of the supernatural.

Based on what knowledge?

I can see your point and I respect that point of view. On the other hand, you are placing a judgment on God using your limited intelligence and convoluted notions of morality. Do you KNOW the moral system of God better than what God KNOWS them to be?

Then you do acknowledge that there are other aspects of God aside from the one that is applicable to this thread?

Jesus was a man who was the first to acknowledge the presence of God within. Because of that recognition on the part of Jesus, God was made manifest within Jesus. Jesus also declared that every man is a 'god'; giving recognition of God dwelling within each man/woman/child. So what point are you attempting to make?

See above, See above, See above.

I am a man that follows the teachings of Jesus. I bear no labels that are manufactured by man and that are often abused by man during such usage of those labels. I do not reject the divinity of Jesus, nor the divinity of the Christ.

 

Now this is a interesting post.

The idea you put forth is heresy according to Orthadoxy (especially RC doctrine) but I tend to agree that these ideas are more along the line of what Christ was actually trying to get across.

I do not personally think that Jesus meant that every man "is" a God, but that God, or the essense of God, could be found within.

Jesus was not the first to acknowledge this as there were many who came before Christ that had the same idea. Eastern religions had such ideas many centuries prior to Jesus.

Perhaps this is where Jesus disappeared to for most of his life.

 

Do you really think that I am concerned about the 'orthadoxy'? I have repeated stated that I do not adhere to the teachings of the 501c3 churches, and for the most part have shown evidence where even the RC is one of those 501c3 organizations... along with Baptist, Methodist, Episcopal, and many other doctrinal organizations.

I can accept that interpretation. Having the essence of God within, would accommodate each man with the ability to say that he/she was a 'god'... using the little 'g' showing a distinction between being "God" and being a "god" ... man being lesser in authority, ability, knowing, etc.

How many of those other religions had such a person as Jesus, who rose from the dead? Or healed blind eyes, made the lame walk, revived others from death?

Perhaps it is.

 

C'mon folks. We only have a few votes cast here and I truly do want to see the non-theists take this thread and poll by a landslide victory. The weekend is upon us and this poll is only active for a total of four days... get some of your buddies to cast a vote.

 

To help the non-Theists in their votes on predestination as it applies to the lives of those non-theists, I am submitting the following link. I personally the information on this link to be very well written, it show an in depth knowledge of the scripture with regard to that subject. Please read it. http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/08/little-known-bible-verses-xiv.html

 

Well, the poll has finished and it appears that the Atheists win.

Predestination does not affect their fate, therefore 'free will' exists.

 

A being with a non-linear perception of time would preserve both omniscience and free will. Let's face it, once people start talking about omnipotence (since god is omnipotent as well as omniscience), logic goes out the window.

 

Mans notion of logic has been 'out the window' from the moment it was first conceived.

 

I'm not sure if I understand the question...

Going by what your book says, everything is effectively predestined and free will is actually false.

Going by what rational skepticism says, the only predestination that exists involves a level of atomic determinism so complex that, for all practical purposes, we have free will.

 

If that's the case, then how do you live your life? If you reject logic, then all you have left is instinct, intuition, emotions, and pure conjecture.

 

And what does the atheists and other non-theists have other than instinct, intuition, emotions, and a different philosophy based on conjecture?

 

Evidence and reason.

 

Everyone has evidence and anyone capable of 'normal thinking' is also equipped with 'reason'. so what is your point?

 

Ironically (and somewhat humorously), the creation of your straw men by constantly applying an inaccurate definition (based on the context) of "reason" as "normal thinking", you lack the very "reason" you advocate.