J
Jon_S_1
Guest
All three premesise make assumptions about God contrary to the Christian understanding of God.
If you want to further your argument I suggest you establish your premises
- Status
If you want to further your argument I suggest you establish your premises
P
Paddy_Walker
Guest
It feels illogical, and it should, because you are thinking about time as if it were a measure of everything. Instead time is something that never existed before matter was created. But still something existed before matter, and so, before time. Can we think without reference to time? That we must do if we wish to think about life before time. But its confusing because as soon as we say ‘life before time’ we are admitting into our argument an experience of time, our own ‘lives’.
So how do we think about life before time? I could think about it a a blank sheet of white paper; and on it is what will come, past, present and future, for material things. on it I see everything. Its a different way of thinking because the rules are different for material and spiritual substances. A spiritual substance doesn’t need a material existence or its rules of conduct. If a spiritual substance needs to be on any particular point of that white paper I mentioned then it is simply there, no time passes, as all of the white space is spirit.
But from a materials perspective time must pass, material must maneuver itself to another part of the white paper and in the process lose a little part of itself, which we measure, as a material being, a measurement of time.
But back to the spiritual realm, the spirit comes and goes, appearing here and there as it wishes on the sheet of white paper without losing any part of itself and so, from our perspective, not experiencing time. This does not limit the spirits action, it merely limits our ability to measure time in its realm. Since the spirit is always the spirit it does not change from our perspective but it is from its perspective perfectly free to act as it wishes, it is not constrained by the object which was created within it, which we, for want of better understanding, call time.
R
runningdude
Guest
You are begging the question; basically God cannot intervene because God cannot intervene. In your first criteria, omniscience is arbitrarily define as perfect knowledge not " subject to change". Your argument is that God cannot intervene is because this would change state of knowledge, which cannot be done. Thus God cannot intervene based on an arbitrary definition of one of his attributes.
In order for your argument to be valid, you must first justify your definition of omniscience.
B
Bahman
Guest
What is outside and inside from God point of view? Creation is the place of forms, there is absolute nothingness outside of it, nothing could exist in absolute nothingness.
This we discuss it and deduce that God could only perform one action. Moreover accepting God omniscience is contingent to any extra action.
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
Apparently this thread is in a “state of timeless”
B
Bahman
Guest
I understand your problem but we cannot exist in state of timeless since we experience changes. Why we experience changes with the same rate is subject of discussion. You can read more about it here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_%28arrow_of_time%29
B
Bahman
Guest
The important thing is there is no flaw anywhere and things are consistent.
For example God in state timeless is causally separated from creation is consistent with God is dead, one is stronger than another one. This is how logical reasoning proceed.
What else than thought exist my friend.
I hope so, then I start to think what is wrong with my reasoning which is very constructive.
B
Bahman
Guest
The only thing that God revealed is the creation and that is it. It is very simple my friend God in state of timeless can only perform one action which was creation, so I am sorry there is no revelation.Once again, you can’t judge anything about God by human logic. Those bound by time don’t know any thing about what can or can’t be done in eternal time. We can only know by what He has revealed.
Linus2bd
B
Bahman
Guest
Accepting the fact that second premise is flawed means two things, first God omnipotence cannot have a conflict with God omniscience, second God cannot perform any action after creation since otherwise that cause a change in God knowledge.
B
Bahman
Guest
Could you please give me a definition God omniscience so we start from there?
Let me start with this definition
- Omniscience is the capacity to know everything that there is to know.
- God action would change the state of creation and so change state of knowledge.
- So God cannot perform any action.
I can agree with point one.
Point 2 however is nonsensical. You assume that an action of God alters creation and negates knowledge of it. That assumption is unfounded.
B
Bahman
Guest
That means that God action alters creation and knowledge (future of creation) which it has a conflict with God omniscience.
In changing anything, God knows what was, God knows what will come, and God knows every possibility in between.
I do not see where a change, even one caused by God, changes this knowledge.
O
OliverR
Guest
What you describe is a sleeping God, simply dreaming of human experience.
If the whole of creation exists before God then past, present and future make no difference to Him, His creation needs these terms to express and to understand our condition but for Him they have no purpose outside of communication.
G
George_Stegmeir
Guest
For Bahman: I am not going to waste my time debating you. All those who believe in the Abrahamic G*d believe He is omniscient as well as omnipresent. I suggest that you look up the word omniscient in the dictionary.
That being the case, your premise is specious at best.
That being the case, your premise is specious at best.
B
Bahman
Guest
The first important question is how God could intervene in creation without messing with our free will? Because things in creation are things (which moves deterministically based on law of nature) and being (who decide).
Any intervention cause a change in current state of creation which lead to a change in state of creation in future. This means that state of creation in future with and without God intervention are different which means that knowledge of God about creation is subject of change depending on whether God intervene in creation or not.
S
ServantPD
Guest
Isn’t your free-will greatly reduced when you choose to have a lovely relationship with someone? It’s not that we don’t have free will, it’s that we freely allow God to help us, with a tacit give-away of free-will, just like we would have with a girlfriend, bride or, the biggest prison of all, a wife.
And the future isn’t determines. I simply need to summon the Free Will Theorem to refute that with laws of nature…
B
Bahman
Guest
Getting a spouse is interplay between several entities namely instinct, logical thinking, etc that free will play the last important part in it. I don’t understand what God has to do with this?Isn’t your free-will greatly reduced when you choose to have a lovely relationship with someone? It’s not that we don’t have free will, it’s that we freely allow God to help us, with a tacit give-away of free-will, just like we would have with a girlfriend, bride or, the biggest prison of all, a wife.
This I already discuss it in depth with others but God omniscience means that future is determined from God point of view knowing what decision beings make and how things move.And the future isn’t determines. I simply need to summon the Free Will Theorem to refute that with laws of nature…
S
ServantPD
Guest
Your argument that He messes with our free will is no refutation to the fact God gives free will to us, as the very concept to be in communion with Him comes from the consequence a relationship had started. People do have a choice to make: wheter they want to have their freedom a bit shrinked and have an objective meaning of life, or having no objective meaning to it and live in absolute absurdity.
There are random factors at the quantum level, so at the human level, determinism is patently false. Wheter you want to blame God for rolling the dice or whatever, you can’t say we are determined, much less God. Everything can’t be well predicted in the universe, and so free will is possible, wheter you like it or not. As the requirement for determinism is to predict exactly what will happen over a long period of time, you can’t even predict exactly what’s going to happen at the quantum level in your own atoms. Forget it!
B
Bahman
Guest
Free will has noting to do with random effect and Quantum Mechanics. Quantum Mechanics is deterministic as far as we don’t mess with the measurement. I mean the Schrodinger equation is a deterministic equation, so state of a thing evolve deterministically until it is disturbed by measurement. From God point of view thing has to evolve determinstically since otherwise it oppose God omniscience.There are random factors at the quantum level, so at the human level, determinism is patently false. Wheter you want to blame God for rolling the dice or whatever, you can’t say we are determined, much less God. Everything can’t be well predicted in the universe, and so free will is possible, wheter you like it or not. As the requirement for determinism is to predict exactly what will happen over a long period of time, you can’t even predict exactly what’s going to happen at the quantum level in your own atoms. Forget it!
- Status