Do you accept the theory of evolution? - Part 1

[Shemtov]

What's the point of those rules if God knows what you're going to do at all times?

Not everyone who believes in the Bible believes in predestination.

 

[Marvolo]

Not everyone who believes in the Bible believes in predestination.

I believe that person is referring to God's omniscience and knowledge of the future. If God has everything planned and knows everything then whatever we do was allowed by him and planned by him. So whats the point of the rules?

 

[Thundercrack85]

I suppose you could debate if that's predestination. Perhaps a deity could have many planned routes.

Not that it really matters... None of it does.

 

[Marvolo]

Look at adam and eve and the fruit. God has these two innocent beings unaware of sin or shame. He tells them not to eat of this one particular tree knowing full well if they do they will curse mankind for ever. Oh well surely they wont do it. They do and mankind is cursed. If god was a human father who told his children not to play with a gun and he left the gun laying on the table and the kid shot himself he would be in deep ****. Its irresponsible. And then you have the fact that god knew all along that they would eat from the tree cause he is all knowing. If genesis is meant to be read literally then it is a lesson in poor parenting. I understand letting kids make mistakes. Letting adam and eve stump there toes or fall on their faces is one thing. Letting them curse mankind is the ****ing blunder of all blunders.

 

[Thundercrack85]

That's the thing about an all powerful, all controlling being.

You're essentially describing a psychopath.

And then you look at said being's behavior (plagues, ordering genocides, filicide, etc) ... you have just that, a psychopath.

 

[Marvolo]

That's the thing about an all powerful, all controlling being.

You're essentially describing a psychopath.

And then you look at said being's behavior (plagues, ordering genocides, filicide, etc) ... you have just that, a psychopath.

And the whole "thou shalt have no gods before me" is jealousy and narcissim.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I'd say calling yourself a god would constitute as narcissism... but to get back on topic,

I have yet to see anyone object to evolution for any secular reasons.

 

[Lighthouse]

I'd say calling yourself a god would constitute as narcissism... but to get back on topic,

I have yet to see anyone object to evolution for any secular reasons.

I object to it because of all the creatures in the "Kill it with Fire" thread.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I used to be a creationist when I was Catholic, but about the time I turned 18 that was over for good. Now I'm nothing but agnostic.

Did the memo not make it across the pond?

Catholics don't believe in literal creationism. It's been theistic evolution since the fifties.

 

[Greens]

I object to it because of all the creatures in the "Kill it with Fire" thread.

That's the only legit criticism I've read lately I'm genuinely afraid to go in that thread.

 

[Ash J. Williams]

I believe that person is referring to God's omniscience and knowledge of the future. If God has everything planned and knows everything then whatever we do was allowed by him and planned by him. So whats the point of the rules?

You have to take into account that God's foreknowledge of what one chooses to do doesn't cause the person to make that choice. In other words, I know that the sky is blue, but knowing that doesn't make it blue. Since your argument deals with God's omniscience and free will and since there is a lot on the subject, it wouldn't hurt to do some research of your own.

For instance, the following basically deals with what I've said but sheds some light on it:

[YT]fYoWhxOK8dE[/YT]

Some more examples: http://www.comereason.org/phil_qstn/phi038.asp

 

[nogster]

If god is omniscient, then free will is an illusion. As we are but robots to something that created us who knows exactly every choice we will make.
There can be no defending this.

The examples above are poor and have no comparison to an omniscient creator.

There is a huge difference between knowing someone well enough that you can make an educated guess of their actions, and omniscience. Esspecially an omniscient being that is also omnipresent and omnipotent.

Now when you add omnibenevolent which Christians so proudly describe their god as, then you have a real problem.

But this is off topic so.......

 

[Doctor Evo]

You have to take into account that God's foreknowledge of what one chooses to do doesn't cause the person to make that choice. In other words, I know that the sky is blue, but knowing that doesn't make it blue. Since your argument deals with God's omniscience and free will and since there is a lot on the subject, it wouldn't hurt to do some research of your own.

For instance, the following basically deals with what I've said but sheds some light on it:

[YT]fYoWhxOK8dE[/YT]

Some more examples: http://www.comereason.org/phil_qstn/phi038.asp

You and the website provided completely ignore the act of creation. That's the critical point. God is essentially setting into motion a predetermined chain of events with that single act. At least, that's the crux of the argument being made.

 

[Mandalore464]

Edit : Deleted

 

[Doctor Evo]

I don't believe in God but unless I'm missing something here (I could be) I don't think you're right in this specific case.

If you are facing two options (let's say taking the path on your left or the one on your right), and God knows which you're going to pick, it doesn't take away your free will.

Let's say you choose to take the path on the left. God knew you would. but you're still the one who chose to. You were not programed to.

You did not choose the path on your right, but not because God knew you wouldn't. Only because it was your choice not to. Which God happened to know.

His omniscience in this case is more of an intimate knowledge of what's going to happen. Not the ability to interfere with and program what we choose to do.

If I'm misunderstanding the whole thing, please enlighten me.

The point is that God knew every choice and action you would make before he created you. I think that's what you're missing. The act of creation is critical.

 

[Mandalore464]

Edit : Deleted

 

[nogster]

it only works if what you're saying is that God shapes the world by only creating the individuals who will make things He wants to see happen. But I don't think anyone is saying this.

How can an omniscient, omnipotent god create anything that doesnt shape the world to his will?

he knows everything. your actions, why, how, when, and what repurcussions it has. and he created you. So why create you if your decisions are unwanted?


If this god was only omniscient but wasnt omnipresent or vice versa. then fair anough.. But he is supposedly both [and omnipresent and omnibenelovent]. As he created us. Nothing is not part of his plan, He created us knowing exactly the choices we would make and how that would play in the rest of existence.

It is logically impossible for an all knowing, all powerful being to create something that is contrary to his will.

 

[Mandalore464]

Edit : Deleted

 

[Thundercrack85]

Existence must be so boring and unfulfilling if you believe in an all powerful deity.

Your life is just him playing... what must seem to him to be, a very boring game.

You're a glorified play thing.

 

[Bill]

Well then I'm still missing it.

Even if he knew what you'd do before you even existed, you're still the one making it happen by your own choice and free will.

At no moment were those choices programed into you...

Omniscience is not omnipotence. it's the ability to know what others do, not to make them do it.

It only works if what you're saying is that God shapes the world by only creating the individuals who will make things He wants to see happen. But I don't think anyone is saying this.

The main point is that humans are being punished for choices that two initial ones made, but these choices were known before the first atom was created, but the act of Creation went forth in spite of the knowledge that the set of circumstances that were set into motion would lead to the current state of Creation.

It's like building a sand castle at the low tide line and then getting angry at the high tide for washing it away. If He didn't want bad things to happen, then don't create a set of circumstances that lead in that direction.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Well then I'm still missing it.

Even if he knew what you'd do before you even existed, you're still the one making it happen by your own choice and free will.

At no moment were those choices programed into you...

God knowingly put that sequence of events into motion when he created you. I'm not sure which part of this concept is eluding you. In this context, the act of creation is what destroys free will.

Omniscience is not omnipotence. it's the ability to know what others do, not to make them do it.

I'm aware of the distinction. That isn't at all the point. You seem to be assuming that God is not acting anywhere in the process, but he IS: at the moment of creation. Your argument consistently fails to take this into account.

It only works if what you're saying is that God shapes the world by only creating the individuals who will make things He wants to see happen. But I don't think anyone is saying this.

How can free will exist when all of your actions are predetermined, and the act of creation is what sets those events into motion?

Before you say, "But your actions aren't predetermined," let me stop you: they ARE, simply because God KNEW every single action you would take BEFORE he created you. By creating you, he directly puts that sequence of events into motion. It is HIS doing.

 

[Lighthouse]

Question for those who have a better base in science than I do. Why is evolution not a law instead of a theory. Isn't it objectively observed to really be happening. Wouldn't evolution be a law(what's happening) and natural selection be the theory(why it's happening)?

 

[Bill]

Question for those who have a better base in science than I do. Why is evolution not a law instead of a theory. Isn't it objectively observed to really be happening. Wouldn't evolution be a law(what's happening) and natural selection be the theory(why it's happening)?

Here is a good answer.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Or that.

 

[Lighthouse]

Ah, I had forgotten about the mathematics.