Mageth

I said:
I think you need to reword the last sentence, as it makes no sense.

Magus replied:
I worded it just fine, predestination doesn't exist.

Let's look at the sentence in question:

"The fact that he knows what will happen before it does, doesn't prevent it from happening. "

The sentence says, in essense:
1) god knows an event will happen before it happens
2) this knowledge does not prevent the event from happening.

In other words, the event happens even though god knows its going to happen. How does that support the claim that predestination doesn't exist?

The fact that you know in 5 years the sun will rise in the east and set in the west doesn't mean the sun is predestined by you to do so. If a mom gives her child a piece of cake and broccoli, the mom knows which the child will choose. Does that mean the child never had the choice in the first place?

Neither case is analogous to the claim of god's foreknowledge. For the sun risising in the east and setting in the west, I base my "foreknowledge" on the fact that the sun has consistently risen in the east and set in the west in my past experience. I can't claim to know for a fact that the sun will do so in the future. For god, god has supposedly observed, or is able to observe, the sun rise in the east and set in the west 5 years from now. His knowledge is not based on past experience, but on observation of the actual event in question. God knows whether or not the sun will rise in the east and set in the west 5 years in the future.

Because he didn't want you to be a mindless robot, in which case creating you would have served no purpose.

You claim to know an awful lot about god's purpose and potentialities. Do you speak as his mouthpiece?

I said:
Exactly. So the gunmaker at least shares responsibility for the use of the gun for an unintended purpose.

Magus replied:
Not according to other posts by people on the subject, and not according to our morality and justice system. Gun manufacturings don't get sued everytime someone is murdered with their gun.

The fact is, gun manufacturers have been sued, and laws have been passed that limit what kinds of guns they can manufacture and sell in the country. Further, in our "morality system", at least some responsibility is imparted on the manufacturers of guns and other items for the use of their products.

Mageth, how many times do i need to say it. God did not create sin itself, only the scenario where its possible for sin to exist.

He defined sin, he set up the system where sin is possible, he created the creatures that have the potential to sin, he set them up in a situation where the temptation to sin was present (oddly, without giving them "knowledge of good and evil), and he had foreknowledge that they would sin. God is most certainly responsible for sin.

Yes God created the possibility to do wrong, but he didn't introduce it in the world.

Here are your words:

"Think about it, if God gave them no commandment, they could never have had the possibility of doing wrong, because God didn't decree that doing anything was wrong. "

By your own words, god decreed what was wrong, therefore introducing "wrong" into the world. No decree, no wrong.

Had Adam and Eve not chosen to disobey God, sin wouldn't exist today. We still would have the possibility to do wrong though, but if we never disobeyed God in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess.

A bit of a strong statement. I would assume that, even if A&E wouldn't have made their "choice", at some point at least one of the billions of people since would have exercised their free will to do wrong.

Further, the bible indicates that god knew A&E would sin through his foreknowledge (after all, Jesus was predestined to die for our sins "from before the foundation of the earth" or something like that), so the idea that they could have done otherwise (god's foreknowledge and all) is not exactly a supportable claim.

You can say God introduced it in the world all you want, doesn't mean its true.

And you can say he didn't, and that doesn't make it true. So what?

And if he didn't do that, we would never have the ability to do anything but what God wants you to do. No free thought, nothing on your own, no choice to watch TV or pray, no choice to go to the movies instead of "church". You would be a robot.

Not true, as others have indicated. Free will does not require the ability to do "wrong". If god wouldn't have decreed wrong, we could do anything without what we do resulting in "sin", no?. And we wouldn't be robots.

By allowing Free will, God allowed humans to make choices that are in harmony with God and those that aren't, He never created sinful, evil humans, only the possibility for them to exist.

And if he wouldn't have created the possibility for sinful, evil humans to exist, we humans could be about exercising our free will without all this damn guilt being flung at us all the time.

Apparently its not so simple since you keep questioning it. Do you not value your ability to choose what you want to do and what you want to think?

Of course, but I could do just that without what I do or think ever being labeled "wrong".

Then stop arguing over a being you don't even believe in.

No, you stop demanding that I stop arguing/discussing things. It's ridiculous, and getting a bit tiresome. Note that I'm arguing concepts of god, doctrines built around god, not an extant being.

Note that your above demand could be equally applied to you "arguing" atheism, evolution, etc. "Don't argue against the non-existence of god, as you don't believe in the non-existence of god! Don't argue against evolution, as you don't believe in evolution!" I won't, of course, demand that you stop arguing any of those topics.

God didn't create sin, he created the scenario for sin to come about through humans. Its his creation, he deemed it so.

Your last sentence makes my point. "It's his creation, he deemed it so." It seems you really agree god is responsible for sin, but just can't see it!

You don't believe in it, so stop arguing over it!

I'm about ready to ask a moderator to suggest that you stop your ridiculous demands that I stop doing things.

But I won't, at least not yet, as such silly demands only detract from your arguments.

Apparently you don't since you keep bringing it up and asking the same redundant questions about it.

I ask the same questions because they're important questions, and I have yet to see from you, or anyone else, satisfactory answers to them.

And no you couldn't argue on this side better because you would have to believe God exists and is perfect which is apparently impossible for you to do.

If you knew much about "argument", you would know that even a layman debator can argue either side of an issue, regardless of what he or she believes about the subject. All I would have to do is state "Assuming god exists, and is perfect..." as a preface to my argument. Basic high school debate class.

Sorry i don't see any contradictions, i thought you could defend God better than me?

Obviously, I can, for a good defender would not be blind. You claim to not even see any contradictions. A good defender would be able to see the contradictions, admit they exist, and to provide at least a plausible argument to reconcile the contradictions. The defender would, however, never claim simply that the condradictions didn't exist.

Iv'e given a perfectly good explanation for sin and God, just because you don't accept it doesn't mean its an invalid contradiction.

Obviously, your explanation is not "perfectly good", or else it would have convinced me! I don't accept it because it doesn't answer the objections that have been raised to it. As I and others have pointed out, your explanation leaves much to be desired.

You won't be bringing any "reborn" Christians to your side in this lifetime. You can bring up the subject all you want but true Christians don't see any problems. They believe in God and what he says is true.

As someone else pointed out, the No True Scotsman rides again!

I would argue that a "true" Christian (or at least an intellectually honest christian) would not be willingly blind, and would be willing to admit that there are problems with aspects of theology and at least think about and perhaps try to address the problems, rather than just blindly believing. If that was truly the nature of "true" christians, none of the theological works of literature would exist, would they?

I'm just not gonna bother responding to anymore of your redundant, pointless arguments about sin and God.

The mythical ostrich with its head in the sand comes to mind.

Christians will trust God any day before the claims of humans, so its wasting your breath. Only thing you are doing is bringing other people who may be open to the idea of God, to their own eternal punishment. Go you!

Rather, to their senses. Are any in the audience out there open to willingly blinding themselves to reason and discussion as Magus suggests you do?

Go me!

Apparently you were just subconsiously hoping someone would disuade you from Jesus.

Apparently you assume an awful lot about my state of mind. Do you have ESP and, if so, were you watching me during my struggle with belief?

If the Holy Spirit dwelled within you, you wouldn't have given up on Jesus so easily.

If the holy spirit existed, why did he not hear and answer my calls for his presence, help and guidance? I wanted to believe.

And who said it was easy? It took 45 years of struggle, it was not easy then, and it is not "easy" now. Now I'm a lone atheist in a large family of "reborn" christians (excepting my younger sister). Trust me, it's not easy. Picture yourself as the lone Christian in a family, indeed a society, chock full of Muslims and you may begin to understand.

"Reborn" Christians hear these lame arguments from atheists every day and they endure many many hardships in life, yet their faith only gets stronger.

And many atheists and agnostics, here on this board and elsewhere, including myself, were every bit as much a "reborn" christian as you at one point in their life. A tough pill to swallow for you, I guess, what with your head in the sand and all. But a cold, hard, irrefutable fact.

Of course, i guess we are all just psychotic Such a shame.

Call yourself what you want. I'm not in the business of judging other people's state of mind, as you seem wont to do.

ReasonableDoubt

Magus55,

Why do you say with such certainty that predestination doesn't exist? You write off Calvinism - while there are lots of Christians who believe that. I myself am trying to hold onto CHristianity, and I think the only thing that can make sense is Calvinism.

That theology acknowledges many of the problems that have been posted here in this thread. It acknowledges that predestination does exist, that God is the prime mover, that God is responsible for human action, that God had a plan and had Christ's death planned BEFORE Adam and Eve.

What that plan is we don't know, and we may think it is very unfair. But a lot of people trust that god is in control and knows better than we do. Granted, there are a whole lot of problems with Calvinism as well...but many people believe it to be the most consistent theology.

Not that you need to agree, but I am bothered by your categorically dismissive treatment of it.