God created evil

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bahman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Catolico65 said:
With all due respect the only thing you have proven is your lack of logic and English comprehension.
Click to expand...
Nah, I just assume God existence and its omniscience. These are my axioms not the conclusion. What was the result of these axioms is pure fatalism meaning that there is one and only one solution to any situation when a decision is involved in choosing multiple options. This means that one and only one option is true and the thinking process which leads to true option is solely a mandatory task. Why?, because God is open to our decision and we are closed so the process of thinking is required for us not for God.
 
Paddy_Walker said:
But you are always free. You are always free to choose one or other of those two things. If even only for an experiment. And the results of both choices are totally different. You cannot claim that you can only ever choose the same thing. Because you know that is not true. You could change your mind for any reason or no reason, or just randomly. And the end result will be different.
Click to expand...
No, we are not always free when we are dealing with a situation if the number of principle we have accepted is enough and sufficient to deal with a situation. We are obliged to perform an action if the principles which acts as a constraint on us defines our action. Consider the example of old woman, since I accept the principle “treat people as you like to be treated” and the fact that “I don’t like to be beaten” defines my action, meaning that I would help old woman instead of beating her. In this case the principles are sufficient. What if I do otherwise, this means that the principle I accepted is not sufficient to determine my action in that situation hence it comes to conflict with another principle.
 
Bahman said:
No, we are not always free when we are dealing with a situation if the number of principle we have accepted is enough and sufficient to deal with a situation. We are obliged to perform an action if the principles which acts as a constraint on us defines our action. Consider the example of old woman, since I accept the principle “treat people as you like to be treated” and the fact that “I don’t like to be beaten” defines my action, meaning that I would help old woman instead of beating her. In this case the principles are sufficient. What if I do otherwise, this means that the principle I accepted is not sufficient to determine my action in that situation hence it comes to conflict with another principle.
Click to expand...
You are not obliged to do anything. You are free to help or harm the poor old woman. It does not matter about principles or any other distractions. You have before you two choices with two radically different outcomes. You could literally toss a coin and go to either heaven or hell for all eternity. That is how free you are.
 
Bahman said:
Nah, I just assume God existence and its omniscience. These are my axioms not the conclusion. What was the result of these axioms is pure fatalism meaning that there is one and only one solution to any situation when a decision is involved in choosing multiple options. This means that one and only one option is true and the thinking process which leads to true option is solely a mandatory task. Why?, because God is open to our decision and we are closed so the process of thinking is required for us not for God.
Click to expand...
Repetition in of itself does not imbue meaning nor logic. You have fooled no one my friend, much less yourself.
 
Paddy_Walker said:
You are not obliged to do anything. You are free to help or harm the poor old woman. It does not matter about principles or any other distractions. You have before you two choices with two radically different outcomes. You could literally toss a coin and go to either heaven or hell for all eternity. That is how free you are.
Click to expand...
By obliged I meant that my action is determined by a set of principle. In another word, the set of principle was sufficient for the decision. If I want to see the world from your perspective, I won’t beat woman if I want to go to heaven and it means that going to heaven was not a sufficient principle if I do otherwise for whatever other reasons.

Simple if you do X as a result of believing in reason Rx then the reason Rx was sufficient for your action hence your action was determined. In this case the reason Rx was sufficient for the decision.

You are in trouble if two reasons lets call Rx and Ry comes to conflict when two options X and Y are involved. At the end you either do X or Y meaning that either one of these reasons was sufficient for your action. There must be a reason for your action at the end, is it?
 
Catolico65 said:
Do you believe repeating your same questions over and over is predetermined?
Click to expand...
You don’t answer my simple question!? So yes, it could be predetermined meaning that we are not going anywhere while you don’t answer my simple question.
 
Bahman said:
By obliged I meant that my action is determined by a set of principle. In another word, the set of principle was sufficient for the decision. If I want to see the world from your perspective, I won’t beat woman if I want to go to heaven and it means that going to heaven was not a sufficient principle if I do otherwise for whatever other reasons.

Simple if you do X as a result of believing in reason Rx then the reason Rx was sufficient for your action hence your action was determined. In this case the reason Rx was sufficient for the decision.

You are in trouble if two reasons lets call Rx and Ry comes to conflict when two options X and Y are involved. At the end you either do X or Y meaning that either one of these reasons was sufficient for your action. There must be a reason for your action at the end, is it?
Click to expand...
no. reason for your acts in this case are just a distraction. reasons never forced anyone in the sense of predetermination which I think is what you are getting at. reasons are more often used as excuses after the fact.
 
Paddy_Walker said:
no. reason for your acts in this case are just a distraction. reasons never forced anyone in the sense of predetermination which I think is what you are getting at. reasons are more often used as excuses after the fact.
Click to expand...
Can you please give me a definition of free will so we can start from there?
 
Bahman said:
Can you please give me a definition of free will so we can start from there?
Click to expand...
Catholicism starts with the definition of “will.”

Before one can add “free”, someone needs to define “will” according to correct Catholic teaching.
 
Bahman said:
You don’t answer my simple question!? So yes, it could be predetermined meaning that we are not going anywhere while you don’t answer my simple question.
Click to expand...
As all your questions have been answered that can mean either you don’t understand English or you believe it is predetermined to repeat and repeat and repeat…
 
grannymh said:
Catholicism starts with the definition of “will.”

Before one can add “free”, someone needs to define “will” according to correct Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
Can you please give me a definition of will? 😃
 
Catolico65 said:
As all your questions have been answered that can mean either you don’t understand English or you believe it is predetermined to repeat and repeat and repeat…
Click to expand...
All I am asking is to answer this simple question: Based on what you say you think we are open to our decisions prior to make them? If you wish you can provide your axioms by definitions and we can start from there.
 
grannymh said:
Whose omniscience are you talking about?

Depending on whom you choose as being omniscient, there may be an opportunity to use a philosophical approach.
Click to expand...
Granny, as far as I know, there’s only One who is omniscient.

This is Shannon9791 BTW, my account got locked so I had to re-create.
 
Bahman said:
To be honest I didn’t find a clear definition of free will from this article. Lets start from this: “Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act”. This definition lack to define what will is. Can you please define will for me?
Click to expand...
wish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top