Sapere aude

[Thomas]

Here is the Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart on Theological Determinism:

Post moved to a new thread

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

OK – but as 'Us' is generally understood as fallible, ephemeral and contingent by both science and religion, and you haven't offered any reason, proof nor evidence why one should think otherwise, I'd say there's a gulf between the two positions.

Was I supposed to?

You also seem to hint at some determinate order in which such operations can take place?

Like?

As said, allowing for the nature of the Infinite and the All-Possible, there might well be such a world, but it is not this one.

Sounds convenient enough

From the viewpoint of this world, the question is self-defeating because that which by definition is 'God' is not subject to any constraint.
Therefore logic says the critique is ill-founded.

Whose definition?

Metaphysics has the answer.

Metaphysics hasn't answered one thing yet . . . don't hold your breath

Yes, but there are 'strong' and 'weak' determinisms, and the arguments against both, tell us the thesis is not cut and dried.


Difficult, yes, but not impossible, and not dependent on your 'wriggle room'.

You're talking about you? I'm talking about an omniscient, omnipotent god who can create a Man from Nothing (clay?) but needs a human woman for His savior. It seems this god is either not what they say He is or there is no god.
The concept of theological determinism posits the existence of an omniscient God who possesses unwavering knowledge of all true statements, including those pertaining to our future actions. The challenge posed by the intersection of free will and theological determinism lies in comprehending whether and how we can truly possess free will when God, with infallible knowledge, already knows our future actions.

God Doesn't Exist

If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
Evil exists.
If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn’t have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn’t know when evil exists or doesn’t have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore . . .

God doesn’t exist.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

..in your opinion.
The fact is, that you do not KNOW whether G-d exists.

I don't have to prove that your god exists, you do . . .

..and btw, the concept of G-d is not the same as goblins in children's story books.
If you think that it is, then you must be either a dim-wit, or lying to yourself.

The idea of god is archetypal just like goblins in children's story books
If you think otherwise, then you must be either ignorant, or lying to yourself.

The Bible and Qur'an are for adults .. it is not classified as fiction for a very good reason.
i.e. It isn't.

Both the Christian bible and the Quran are the words of Man, there is no proof of them being the word of a god
Since practically nothing in either of those fairy tale books can be proven, I'd say they are books of fiction.
Do you still believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus? Adults don't . . .

 

[muhammad_isa]

..The concept of theological determinism posits the existence of an omniscient God who possesses unwavering knowledge of all true statements, including those pertaining to our future actions. The challenge posed by the intersection of free will and theological determinism lies in comprehending whether and how we can truly possess free will when God, with infallible knowledge, already knows our future actions..

I've already answered that numerous times..
Here it is again.

It is all about the nature of time. Time is not immutable, as it appears to be.
That means that time is relative to the perspective of an observer.
Something that we perceive "hasn't happened yet" is just that; "a perception".

G-d is not part of the universe (space-time continuum) by definition.
i.e. He created the universe

This means that as far as G-d is concerned, He sees what we perceive "hasn't happened yet".
It is NOT necessary that G-d CAUSES events to happen because of this.
We still have decisions to make of our own free-will, and are responsible for them.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The idea of god is archetypal just like goblins in children's story books.

You see .. when you say this, you are merely making fun of believers .. inferring
that they are stupid.

Since practically nothing in either of those fairy tale books can be proven, I'd say they are books of fiction..

That is not how you classify fiction and non-fiction.
I hope you don't work in a library .. because it makes no sense.

Fiction is not claimed to be anything other than a story made up by its authors.
..need I go on!

 

[Thomas]

Was I supposed to?

I don't think you can – that's my point.

Like?

I don't know, that's why I say 'seem'. I don't see how the operation is possible without one.

Sounds convenient enough

Well there you go – you accept my reasoning. Of course, there can equally be worlds worse than this one.

Whose definition?

That 'God' is under no constraint? Nigh-on everyone's.
A working definition here could be: "That which causes, and is not caused."
The ontological cause of all, that is itself not caused.

Metaphysics hasn't answered one thing yet . . . don't hold your breath

Well that's certainly an opinion.

The challenge posed by the intersection of free will and theological determinism lies in comprehending whether and how we can truly possess free will when God, with infallible knowledge, already knows our future actions.

Yes it does.

1: God exists
2: If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
3: If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
4: If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
5: If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
6: Evil exists.
7: If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn’t have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn’t know when evil exists or doesn’t have the desire to eliminate all evil. Therefore . . .
8: God doesn’t exist.

Ah, no, sorry, a logical flaw here. (I've numbered your statements for clarity.)

1 posits God exists
2-4 are predicates of God. They either are, or are not, there's no in-betweens.
5 is not a predicate, rather it's an attribute – a desire – but a desire is a want, and God wants for nothing, ergo there is the flaw of this argument.

As the proof rests on a conflict of desire, and by definition God is One (there can be no conflict) and God wants for nothing – the argument fails.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

I've already answered that numerous times..
Here it is again.

It is all about the nature of time. Time is not immutable, as it appears to be.
That means that time is relative to the perspective of an observer.
Something that we perceive "hasn't happened yet" is just that; "a perception".

G-d is not part of the universe (space-time continuum) by definition.
i.e. He created the universe

This means that as far as G-d is concerned, He sees what we perceive "hasn't happened yet".
It is NOT necessary that G-d CAUSES events to happen because of this.
We still have decisions to make of our own free-will, and are responsible for them.

I'll think on that, thanks

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

You see .. when you say this, you are merely making fun of believers .. inferring
that they are stupid.

I'm sorry, this is exactly what you said to me . . . are you now a hypocrite?

That is not how you classify fiction and non-fiction.
I hope you don't work in a library .. because it makes no sense.

Fiction is not claimed to be anything other than a story made up by its authors.
..need I go on!

"Fiction is not claimed to be anything other than a story made up by its authors." . . . need I?

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

I don't think you can – that's my point.


I don't know, that's why I say 'seem'. I don't see how the operation is possible without one.


Well there you go – you accept my reasoning. Of course, there can equally be worlds worse than this one.


That 'God' is under no constraint? Nigh-on everyone's.
A working definition here could be: "That which causes, and is not caused."
The ontological cause of all, that is itself not caused.


Well that's certainly an opinion.


Yes it does.


Ah, no, sorry, a logical flaw here. (I've numbered your statements for clarity.)

1 posits God exists
2-4 are predicates of God. They either are, or are not, there's no in-betweens.
5 is not a predicate, rather it's an attribute – a desire – but a desire is a want, and God wants for nothing, ergo there is the flaw of this argument.

As the proof rests on a conflict of desire, and by definition God is One (there can be no conflict) and God wants for nothing – the argument fails.

Nice Apologetics . . . I'm impressed. I don't buy any of it, but I'm impressed

 

[muhammad_isa]

. . . need I?

No .. because it's childish to classify the Bible & Qur'an as fiction.
Can you prove it's fiction? No.

..and don't make it all about the claimant holding the burdon of proof,
because I can just as easily say that you need to prove that numerous historical events
are all a gigantic conspiracy, in order to classify them as fiction.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

No .. because it's childish to classify the Bible & Qur'an as fiction.
Can you prove it's fiction? No.

..and don't make it all about the claimant holding the burdon of proof,
because I can just as easily say that you need to prove that numerous historical events
are all a gigantic conspiracy, in order to classify them as fiction.

You're kidding, right?
It's childish to believe in make-believe . . . there is not one iota of evidence that anything in either the Christian bible or much less the Quran is true. Both fairytales contain gross inaccuracies for one thing, which if they were The Word of God/Allah wouldn't contain them.

All you adherents need to say is that all this Faith is just that, FAITH, it's what you Believe in for whatever reason. To claim any of these Abrahamic stories to be actual/true is a lie.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..To claim any of these Abrahamic stories to be actual/true is a lie.

..and that is your claim .. your belief. It is not a fact.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is all about the nature of time. Time is not immutable, as it appears to be.
That means that time is relative to the perspective of an observer.
Something that we perceive "hasn't happened yet" is just that; "a perception".

G-d is not part of the universe (space-time continuum) by definition.
i.e. He created the universe

This means that as far as G-d is concerned, He sees what we perceive "hasn't happened yet".
It is NOT necessary that G-d CAUSES events to happen because of this.
We still have decisions to make of our own free-will, and are responsible for them.

Muhammad_isa said: "..and that is your claim .. your belief. It is not a fact."

Got any proof for what you say?
"Haha, Don't ask me for a proof."

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

..and that is your claim .. your belief. It is not a fact.

Name a truth . . .