Total Posts:53|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

God is not Omnibenevolent

ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 6:13:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
This is pretty much copied and pasted from one of my debates. What are everyone's opinions on this argument against omnibenevolence?

Let us assume that God is omnisicient. If God has unlimited knowledge, he knows exactly what humans are going to do before they do it. He knew Eve would eat the Fruit before she did. He knew he would have to flood the earth before humans grew wicked. He knows that every murderer would kill someone before they even act. Because he is omniscient, he knew all this before he even created Creation itself. Here we have a problem.

If God knew of every single sin that humans would commit even before he created humans, why create us in the first place? By creating humans, knowing exactly who would be damned, God effectively damned those people. Hell is described as the ultimate torture and punishment. God knew who would have to suffer hell, but created those people anyway - sending them to eternal damnation.
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 6:17:51 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
You're saying that the Christian God is not omnibenevolent. It is highly probable that the Word has been tainted by the papacy and the Church.

Ignoring that:
The Problem of Evil is a much stronger argument against omnibenevolence. You're argument is weak and mostly fallacious.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 6:22:37 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
If God knew of every single sin that humans would commit even before he created humans, why create us in the first place? By creating humans, knowing exactly who would be damned, God effectively damned those people. Hell is described as the ultimate torture and punishment. God knew who would have to suffer hell, but created those people anyway - sending them to eternal damnation.

False assumptions and bad logic.
What a discovery. You "found out" that hard determinism and omniscient omnibeneovlence are incompatable.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 6:25:53 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Let us assume that God is omnisicient. If God has unlimited knowledge, he knows exactly what humans are going to do before they do it. He knew Eve would eat the Fruit before she did. He knew he would have to flood the earth before humans grew wicked. He knows that every murderer would kill someone before they even act. Because he is omniscient, he knew all this before he even created Creation itself. Here we have a problem.

Would an omnibenevolent God be just? Assuming that hard determinism is false and that some degree of free will exists, regardless of whether or not God allowed sin, God can still be omnibenevolent.

Would an omnibenevolent God create hard deterministic beings and then damn them?

Again, you made the "great discovery" that hard determinism and omnibenevolent theism are incompatible.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 6:55:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 6:25:53 PM, wjmelements wrote:

Would an omnibenevolent God be just? Assuming that hard determinism is false and that some degree of free will exists, regardless of whether or not God allowed sin, God can still be omnibenevolent.

Would an omnibenevolent God create hard deterministic beings and then damn them?

Again, you made the "great discovery" that hard determinism and omnibenevolent theism are incompatible.

This depends on what your definition of Omnibenevolance is, and what the desired ultimate goal for Gods omnibenevolance, is.

At 7/9/2009 6:39:54 PM, HistoryasIS wrote:
I think these sites are of a good read.

http://www.christian-thinktank.com...

it has 7 parts

Massive fail.

Even i can refute most of that.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 7:28:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 6:13:39 PM, ToastOfDestiny wrote:
This is pretty much copied and pasted from one of my debates. What are everyone's opinions on this argument against omnibenevolence?

Let us assume that God is omnisicient. If God has unlimited knowledge, he knows exactly what humans are going to do before they do it. He knew Eve would eat the Fruit before she did. He knew he would have to flood the earth before humans grew wicked. He knows that every murderer would kill someone before they even act. Because he is omniscient, he knew all this before he even created Creation itself. Here we have a problem.

If God knew of every single sin that humans would commit even before he created humans, why create us in the first place? By creating humans, knowing exactly who would be damned, God effectively damned those people. Hell is described as the ultimate torture and punishment. God knew who would have to suffer hell, but created those people anyway - sending them to eternal damnation.

Isn't it common knowledge to reject these arguments on the basis that God exists outside of perceived time? When you talk about prevention, futuresight, cause, and effect, it is strictly in the field of human existence. Since God is timeless, this entire argument is invalid.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 7:29:50 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 6:55:31 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 7/9/2009 6:25:53 PM, wjmelements wrote:

Would an omnibenevolent God be just? Assuming that hard determinism is false and that some degree of free will exists, regardless of whether or not God allowed sin, God can still be omnibenevolent.

Would an omnibenevolent God create hard deterministic beings and then damn them?

Again, you made the "great discovery" that hard determinism and omnibenevolent theism are incompatible.

This depends on what your definition of Omnibenevolance is, and what the desired ultimate goal for Gods omnibenevolance, is.

Well, most people would agree that God would want some degree of free will to exist rather than us having none. Would you prefer free will or none, when considering the consequences?

And most would agree that God would be just.

All the OP proved is that hard determinism and omniscient omnibenevolence are incompatible.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 7:30:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 6:22:37 PM, wjmelements wrote:
If God knew of every single sin that humans would commit even before he created humans, why create us in the first place? By creating humans, knowing exactly who would be damned, God effectively damned those people. Hell is described as the ultimate torture and punishment. God knew who would have to suffer hell, but created those people anyway - sending them to eternal damnation.

False assumptions and bad logic.
What a discovery. You "found out" that hard determinism and omniscient omnibeneovlence are incompatable.

Omniscience is inherently incompatible with ANYTHING BUT hard determinism (You can't know the future if it hasn't even been determined). So if it's also incompatible with hard determinism, that means it is impossible.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 7:43:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 7:30:57 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/9/2009 6:22:37 PM, wjmelements wrote:
If God knew of every single sin that humans would commit even before he created humans, why create us in the first place? By creating humans, knowing exactly who would be damned, God effectively damned those people. Hell is described as the ultimate torture and punishment. God knew who would have to suffer hell, but created those people anyway - sending them to eternal damnation.

False assumptions and bad logic.
What a discovery. You "found out" that hard determinism and omniscient omnibeneovlence are incompatable.

Omniscience is inherently incompatible with ANYTHING BUT hard determinism (You can't know the future if it hasn't even been determined). So if it's also incompatible with hard determinism, that means it is impossible.

Actually, it is only incompatible with entirely free will. Omniscience is compatible with compatibilism because an omnipotent God's omniscience would be greater than one's free will, while this will still exists.

And should this turn into a compatibilism discussion, then I predict that there will be little straying from thoughts that have already been debated by philosophers. We shall then ultimately just be repeating talking points.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 7:44:26 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 7:43:06 PM, wjmelements wrote:
entirely free will.

This here means unlimited free will, which is obviously false.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2009 7:52:04 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Compatabilism is, for the purposes of an omniscient omnibenevolence, the same as determinism, since it revolves around defining "free will" on the force being internal rather than external. If God created it and it's bad, unless it has libertarian (not compatibilist) free will, he is responsible.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 5:06:23 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
God exists in eternity viewing Creation as one views a chess board.
He sees the crucifixion of His Son just as He sees me typing this post.
Some of the 'pieces' on the board are loyal to Him and some to His opponent.
The pieces have free will and as such when one makes a choice the 'future' changes.

Ragnar_Rahl, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.

Matthew10:34
Do NOT think I came to bring peace on Earth.
I did NOT come to bring peace BUT A SWORD.
The Cross.. the Cross.
LB628
Posts: 176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 6:50:51 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 5:06:23 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
God exists in eternity viewing Creation as one views a chess board.
He sees the crucifixion of His Son just as He sees me typing this post.
Some of the 'pieces' on the board are loyal to Him and some to His opponent.
The pieces have free will and as such when one makes a choice the 'future' changes.

Ragnar_Rahl, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.


If I might reply.
It is a fascinating view because it seems to open the possibility that the present is constantly being changed by the past, because even though the present "is" is fixed from our point of view, as is the past, if free will exists throughout eternity, and from God's point of view every single point in history is now, then the present can be changed by the past, but we would, at the same time, never know it had been different than the changes.
resolutionsmasher
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 8:02:03 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 6:13:39 PM, ToastOfDestiny wrote:
This is pretty much copied and pasted from one of my debates. What are everyone's opinions on this argument against omnibenevolence?

Let us assume that God is omnisicient. If God has unlimited knowledge, he knows exactly what humans are going to do before they do it. He knew Eve would eat the Fruit before she did. He knew he would have to flood the earth before humans grew wicked. He knows that every murderer would kill someone before they even act. Because he is omniscient, he knew all this before he even created Creation itself. Here we have a problem.

If God knew of every single sin that humans would commit even before he created humans, why create us in the first place? By creating humans, knowing exactly who would be damned, God effectively damned those people. Hell is described as the ultimate torture and punishment. God knew who would have to suffer hell, but created those people anyway - sending them to eternal damnation.

I only ask you these simple questions.

1) Do you or do you not enjoy the freedom to choose your own destiny?
2) Do you sincerely believe that you in all you physical limits can understand the eternal purposing of God?
3) Have you ever done something considered a sin by the King James Bible?
4) Have you recently read through and attempted to under stand the underlying theme in the Bible?
In the relationship between Obama and the rest of the U.S..... I think the U.S. is getting the short end of the hockey stick.
resolutionsmasher
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 8:03:05 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Somebody PM me when he's answered the questions and I'll give my responce.

TTFN
In the relationship between Obama and the rest of the U.S..... I think the U.S. is getting the short end of the hockey stick.
ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 8:54:54 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 8:02:03 AM, resolutionsmasher wrote:
I only ask you these simple questions.

1) Do you or do you not enjoy the freedom to choose your own destiny?
2) Do you sincerely believe that you in all you physical limits can understand the eternal purposing of God?
3) Have you ever done something considered a sin by the King James Bible?
4) Have you recently read through and attempted to under stand the underlying theme in the Bible?

1) To an extent. If I wanted to be an astronaut, I'd be out of luck. Ditto for being a dictator. I do have the power to make choices now that affect my grades, my friends, and my family.
2) I cannot understand God any more than I can understand a fellow human.
3) Definitely.
4) I've read the Bible when at hotels, but I haven't gotten any farther than the Flood.
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 9:19:56 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
My biggest qualm with the Christian God is his creating humanity, knowing what would happen. In my debate, the response was that God wants us to be with him, and to be with us - this is the ultimate comfort.

There are two problems with that argument. If God wanted us to be with him, he should have created us with him, or at least made everyone Christian. If God wants to be with us, again, he should have created us with him. This also means that God is willing to let people go to Hell in order to meet his own needs.

@ Kleptin

If God is timeless, then how does that affect his ability to intervene in real-world events? If God is also assumed to be omnipotent, or at least powerful enough to influence the world, then he is not also omnibenevolent.

@ wjm

My argument may be common, but I thought of it before I read it somewhere. All I was aiming to show is that, given his actions, the Christian God cannot be both omniscient and omnibenevolent. He could be very wise and omnibenevolent, of omniscient and benevolent, or just very wise and benevolent. But he can't have an infinite capacity in both areas.

@ DAT

Why allow free will to the point where some people [em]will[/em] go to hell? This shows that the Christian God is just benevolent, not omnibenevolent. Also, how do we know God exists outside 'the chessboard'?
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 11:35:41 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 5:06:23 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
God exists in eternity viewing Creation as one views a chess board.
He sees the crucifixion of His Son just as He sees me typing this post.
Some of the 'pieces' on the board are loyal to Him and some to His opponent.
The pieces have free will and as such when one makes a choice the 'future' changes.

Ragnar_Rahl, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
my thoughts are if all of that is true then he isn't omniscient :).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 1:47:47 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 11:35:41 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/10/2009 5:06:23 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
God exists in eternity viewing Creation as one views a chess board.
He sees the crucifixion of His Son just as He sees me typing this post.
Some of the 'pieces' on the board are loyal to Him and some to His opponent.
The pieces have free will and as such when one makes a choice the 'future' changes.

Ragnar_Rahl, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
my thoughts are if all of that is true then he isn't omniscient :).

OK. But the Bible never uses that word. It states He is 'all knowing' BUT that only means 'as all knowing as the giving of free-will allows'.
And I was kinda hoping for a logical analysis of the above. (if you're allowed to be friends with me that is)

James4:7
Therefore SUBMIT to God.
RESIST the devil and he WILL flee from you.
The Cross.. the Cross.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 1:53:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 6:50:51 AM, LB628 wrote:
At 7/10/2009 5:06:23 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
God exists in eternity viewing Creation as one views a chess board.
He sees the crucifixion of His Son just as He sees me typing this post.
Some of the 'pieces' on the board are loyal to Him and some to His opponent.
The pieces have free will and as such when one makes a choice the 'future' changes.

Ragnar_Rahl, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.


If I might reply.
It is a fascinating view because it seems to open the possibility that the present is constantly being changed by the past, because even though the present "is" is fixed from our point of view, as is the past, if free will exists throughout eternity, and from God's point of view every single point in history is now, then the present can be changed by the past, but we would, at the same time, never know it had been different than the changes.

Right. BUT not as exciting as the thought that WE, through OUR choices, are NOW changing the future.

Psalm118:6
The Lord is on MY side;
I will NOT fear.
What can man do to me?
The Cross.. the Cross.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 2:07:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 9:19:56 AM, ToastOfDestiny wrote:
My biggest qualm with the Christian God is his creating humanity, knowing what would happen. In my debate, the response was that God wants us to be with him, and to be with us - this is the ultimate comfort.

There are two problems with that argument. If God wanted us to be with him, he should have created us with him, or at least made everyone Christian. If God wants to be with us, again, he should have created us with him. This also means that God is willing to let people go to Hell in order to meet his own needs.

@ Kleptin

If God is timeless, then how does that affect his ability to intervene in real-world events? If God is also assumed to be omnipotent, or at least powerful enough to influence the world, then he is not also omnibenevolent.

@ wjm

My argument may be common, but I thought of it before I read it somewhere. All I was aiming to show is that, given his actions, the Christian God cannot be both omniscient and omnibenevolent. He could be very wise and omnibenevolent, of omniscient and benevolent, or just very wise and benevolent. But he can't have an infinite capacity in both areas.

@ DAT

Why allow free will to the point where some people [em]will[/em] go to hell? This shows that the Christian God is just benevolent, not omnibenevolent. Also, how do we know God exists outside 'the chessboard'?

Ok, free-will: If God is A then in order for A to be A (a definite article) then by definition A must be not something: Non A.
If A creates a creature with free will then the only choice available is A or non A: This is the story of the garden of Eden.

Hell is simply non A: the absence of God.

God exists outside of the chess board because the chess board is His creation.
He did become a pawn though and sacrifice Himself for the FINAL CHECK-MATE.

Matthew10:34
Do NOT think I came to bring peace on Earth.
I did NOT come to bring peace BUT A SWORD.
The Cross.. the Cross.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 2:35:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
@ Kleptin

If God is timeless, then how does that affect his ability to intervene in real-world events? If God is also assumed to be omnipotent, or at least powerful enough to influence the world, then he is not also omnibenevolent.

Just to touch upon the issue of God being outside of time: If we believe that this mysterious entity is truly omnipotent (even if we are to grant that it is bound by the laws of logic), then we must also believe that this entity is acausal.

Because the mere process of acting is an inherent liability to omnipotence. A truly omnipotent being -- which God is supposed to be -- needs to be acausal. Of course, when you start giving an entity characteristics as wild as this, you start to question the parsimony of it ;D.
amcclinton
Posts: 15
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 3:52:55 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
The Christian God can indeed be both omniscient and omni-benevolent.

I believe the apostle Paul said it best, "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory" Romans 9:21-23
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 4:01:19 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/9/2009 7:52:04 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Compatabilism is, for the purposes of an omniscient omnibenevolence, the same as determinism, since it revolves around defining "free will" on the force being internal rather than external. If God created it and it's bad, unless it has libertarian (not compatibilist) free will, he is responsible.

Actually, because free will still exists, God is not responsible for our actions. Because a level of determinism still exists, then God is still omniscient.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 4:12:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 1:47:47 PM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 7/10/2009 11:35:41 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/10/2009 5:06:23 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
God exists in eternity viewing Creation as one views a chess board.
He sees the crucifixion of His Son just as He sees me typing this post.
Some of the 'pieces' on the board are loyal to Him and some to His opponent.
The pieces have free will and as such when one makes a choice the 'future' changes.

Ragnar_Rahl, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
my thoughts are if all of that is true then he isn't omniscient :).

OK. But the Bible never uses that word. It states He is 'all knowing' BUT that only means 'as all knowing as the giving of free-will allows'.
Omniscient=all knowing.
It's just that according to you all knowing doesn't mean all knowing.

And I was kinda hoping for a logical analysis of the above. (if you're allowed to be friends with me that is)
Analysis on what grounds?

Actually, because free will still exists, God is not responsible for our actions. Because a level of determinism still exists, then God is still omniscient.
That's just the problem. "Free will" in the compatibilist sense does NOT release God from responsibility. It simply holds that the human is ALSO responsible.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 4:40:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 4:12:43 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That's just the problem. "Free will" in the compatibilist sense does NOT release God from responsibility. It simply holds that the human is ALSO responsible.

Assuming that all sin is voluntary, God would not be responsible for it.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 4:48:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
@ DAT
Sure, for there to be 'A', there must be 'Not A'. But if A creates a being with free will, there is not one choice 'A/Not A', but many choices, of which 'A/Not A' is one. I can choose skim, 1%, 2%, or whole milk. That's part of my free will.

An omnibenevolent God would have created humans who believe in him, but are free in every other way. It's that simple.

The issue still stands: why did God create humans?

Also, how does giving his creation free will reduce God's omniscience?

@amc
Can you explain the Romans verse? If we look to Paul's words, and assume that God is the potter, he is not omnibenevolent. To be omnibenevolent, he would have to use all his clay for the 'noble' cause, and none for the 'common' cause.

@Skeptic
Can you explain the term acausal?
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2009 4:49:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/10/2009 4:40:33 PM, wjmelements wrote:

Assuming that all sin is voluntary, God would not be responsible for it.

Since all actions are governed by empirically verifiable data (chemical reactions, etc...) God, being omniscient, would know what this data is. He would also be able to use it to "calculate" our actions based on it.

Since God knows for certain what our actions MUST BE, we cannot act in a fashion that is not in accordance with how God knows we will act.

Since God knows how we will act, if he does not like our action, yet allows it to happen anyway, he cannot blame us for acting.

OR;

Since God is responsible for setting in motion the events that create our impulse to act, he is responsible for the actions themselves.

********************************************

Take your pick. Do you want to do away with God's omnibenevolence, God's omniscience, free will, or morality? Which will it be?