|
Anybody here open to Tarot cards? | by EnzoMatrix | 2007-07-03 01:29:06 |
|
What force is supposed to act upon the cards? | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-03 01:37:36 |
|
Self interpretation. | by EnzoMatrix | 2007-07-03 02:05:38 |
|
So they're just dead organic matter? | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-03 02:11:40 |
|
And yet still... | by EnzoMatrix | 2007-07-03 02:38:30 |
|
For Enzo: a non-secular perspective | by zeitnot | 2007-07-03 04:10:57 |
|
IMO the definition of god | by EnzoMatrix | 2007-07-03 04:57:11 |
|
here's why. [again, non-secular perspective] | by zeitnot | 2007-07-03 05:08:17 |
|
He threw Adam and Eve out of Paradise. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 05:21:12 |
|
You're interpreting a metaphor literally | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 05:35:22 |
|
God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 05:40:38 |
|
Again you're using the word "would" | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 06:04:42 |
|
So, I'm using the word "would". | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 06:20:38 |
|
If he knows it as it's happening | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 06:30:08 |
| The German saying would equivalent |
by CynicalRyan |
2007-07-03 06:39:31 |
to "poking the hornet's nest".
Besides, we already opened a can-of-worms with this discussion alone.
Back to the point: Yes, it does exclude the idea of free will. God knows all. Everything. He has to, or he wouldn't be God. Thus, he knows an event will happen. He knows *when* it will happen [in His time frame, this becomes even more simple, if God exists in all of time at the same time (i.e. isn't bound by the passing of time like we humans)]. He knew the event would happen, and he even knew the consequences (omniscient, remember?). And free will needs uncertainty of actions to work (so it only works on our level, since we cannot see past the choices we don't understand, to quote the Oracle form The Matrix).
The least we can say is, that God was bound by the inevitability of the events of eating an apple. Which is problematic, since God is omnipotent, too.
And I'm getting a headache now. Excuse me, while I'm getting something to drink. :) |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Offcourse we DO realise | by EnzoMatrix | 2007-07-03 06:49:13 |
|
Written and passed on by man, right | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 06:59:56 |
|
And are probably quite distorted in the Old | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 07:06:28 |
|
Quite possibly | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 07:10:36 |
|
That, we do. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 07:14:58 |
|
The fact that there is a god maybe... | by EnzoMatrix | 2007-07-03 07:25:13 |
|
Yes, there can. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 07:30:12 |
|
Now I see | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 06:50:58 |
|
Not a word, but a saying. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 07:05:16 |
|
Again, my interpretation would not | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 07:09:40 |
|
No, I didn't refer to God as all-loving. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 07:18:56 |
|
God *wants* people to act | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 07:38:20 |
|
Yes, you made this clear. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 07:51:39 |
|
A few nitpicks | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 08:14:41 |
|
A few clarifications: | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 08:28:18 |
|
That's a really good question | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 09:07:50 |
|
RE language: Yes, it does. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 09:35:18 |
|
You *really really* | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 09:49:24 |
|
*notes down books* | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 10:01:23 |
|
If you're "not in that habit" | by MatthewDBA | 2007-07-03 10:08:08 |
|
Well, I'm too fond of certain pleasures | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-03 10:10:39 |
|
*dares CynicalRyan* | by esbita | 2007-07-03 10:17:07 |
