@Esquilax

While interesting, the examples you, Esq., provide (the misfired gun & flaccid rapist) are not enough by themselves to validate the premise that an all-knowing, beneficent, and all-powerful god could actually create a perfect world (whatever that means) And your idea of a perfect world seems vague and not particularly well thought out. The potential rape victim is spared, but what happens to the frustrated rapist. Being thwarted and frustrated, even from a wicked desire, is also a form of suffering. To remove all frustration means preventing people from desiring what they cannot have without causing harm to themselves and others. So let’s see where that line of reasoning leads…

Anyone can see that the use of goods can be perverted. Fire is useful for heating and cooking. Fire can also be used with malice or fraud by an arsonist. The intellect can make plans for a bridge or planning a heist. Therefore the first requirement of a perfect world is that all humans must be completely benevolent so as not to intentionally misuse their abilities. To be completely benevolent, a human must only love what is good above all else and accept what is true. In Christianity, the Lord is the Good (that which is most to be desired) and the divine Logos (Truth). Therefore, to be perfect humans must love the Lord above all else and, what is essentially the same, their neighbor as themselves.

At this point you must ask yourself, “is someone that has been brainwashed or under the influence of a hypothetical love potion really in love?” To me, those conditions are substantively the same as having been pre-programmed to offer unconditional love. I say there is a significant difference between choosing to love someone voluntarily versus not having a choice in the matter and that a world in which mutual love is voluntary is better than one in which it is not.

Next…

Making people incapable of considering arson or robbery does not eliminate all potential harm and subsequent suffering. The ignorant and inattentive can cause damage without harmful intent. A grease fire can start while the cook is distracted by a co-worker. People can build houses without knowing they sit on a fault line. In order to prevent all potential harm, humans would need to be fully aware of all potential the consequences of their actions, including the actions of other humans. This creates a problem: all knowledge is limited to what can be known. Since the future does not yet exist, it cannot be known. No one, not even a god that can know everything that it is possible to know, can exactly predict all the outcomes of one’s actions. As such, the actions of free agents may inadvertently bring about harm and suffering, absent moral accountability.

(April 30, 2014 at 10:57 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I have dreams of future events. Completely useless, and seemingly genuine, I kid you not.

So would that invalidate "free will"?

To have a dream come true is coincidence.
There are far greater coincidences in the universe all the time.

Maybe you should stop eating spicy food before bed.

(April 30, 2014 at 7:03 pm)Little lunch Wrote:

(April 30, 2014 at 10:57 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I have dreams of future events. Completely useless, and seemingly genuine, I kid you not.

So would that invalidate "free will"?

To have a dream come true is coincidence.
There are far greater coincidences in the universe all the time.

Like I said, these are seemingly genuine. I've tested that. Places I've never seen and people I've never known. I re-live scenes like watching a movie the second time. Coincidence would be pushing it.
I'm incredibly skeptical all the same.

(April 30, 2014 at 10:59 am)Kitanetos Wrote:

(April 30, 2014 at 10:51 am)Little lunch Wrote: But do you really have a choice to drink that coffee?

Yes. You can drink it or you can not drink it. One has to choose between one or the other, because one cannot do both.

(April 30, 2014 at 10:51 am)Little lunch Wrote: If you drink it you always were going to drink it.

Bolded for emphasis.

The opposite can also be stated. If you don't drink it, you always were going to not drink it.. See above statement about not being able to do both drinking and not drinking; which means a choice is always involved.

I agree that a choice is involved.
Let me put it this way. Someone drops you into a room with two doors. You can choose between one or the other but you didn't choose to be in the room.
After you've chosen one door, if we could rewind back in time to before that choice, would you ever pick the other one?

We are like shadows, we exist but do not really choose our shape or movements.
(Apart from the fact that shadows are not conscious that they exist).

Basically, the reasons we do things, right or wrong is because we were born.
If there is a reason for anything that ever happens, there can be no free will.

If anyone agrees with me or knows what I'm talking about, I wouldn't mind having it explained better, cause I'm shit at it.
I'll go do some research and see if I can find a better interpretation, like from an actual scientist.
:-)

(April 30, 2014 at 12:34 am)ChadWooters Wrote:

(April 29, 2014 at 1:11 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Don't you guys tend to consider heaven to be an ideal world?

Clever. Except you moved the goal post without addressing your unsupported premise that a god worthy of the name could fully conceive and create the fullness of reality free from suffering.

You're the one moving the goalposts. I should expect an all-knowing and all-powerful being should be able to conceive and construct, instantly and flawlessly, such a world, and to do so by expending no more effort than it takes for him to think about it. Your god has omni-qualities only when having them is convenient to your argument. When it's not, all of a sudden, he's got all of these little flaws, imperfections and incapabilities, things he can't do, rules he has to follow.

(April 30, 2014 at 7:13 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:

(April 30, 2014 at 7:03 pm)Little lunch Wrote: To have a dream come true is coincidence.
There are far greater coincidences in the universe all the time.

Like I said, these are seemingly genuine. I've tested that. Places I've never seen and people I've never known. I re-live scenes like watching a movie the second time. Coincidence would be pushing it.
I'm incredibly skeptical all the same.

Of all the dreams you have and the places and people you encounter, you're bound to eventually encounter something that resemble something from one of your dreams. A true test would be to notice the similarity immediately, then predict what's coming next (that wouldn't make a bad suspense thriller).

(April 30, 2014 at 7:46 pm)Coffee Jesus Wrote: Of all the dreams you have and the places and people you encounter, you're bound to eventually encounter something that resemble something from one of your dreams. A true test would be to notice the similarity immediately, then predict what's coming next (that wouldn't make a bad suspense thriller).

That's exactly what happens. I become aware part way through the scene.

I'm not talking 'similar' scenes. I'm talking detailed re enactments. All the actors, scenery, lighting, smoke effects .

---

(April 30, 2014 at 7:31 pm)Little lunch Wrote: If anyone agrees with me or knows what I'm talking about, I wouldn't mind having it explained better, cause I'm shit at it.
I'll go do some research and see if I can find a better interpretation, like from an actual scientist.
:-)

Yep I'm with you. You're describing a mechanistic universe. Nothing happens that doesn't follow a set pattern that we have to follow. Every choice is us following what we always had to chose. Other things and people can influence our actions, but even our most arbitrary of choices are the end result of a series of mechanical steps. Perhaps one of our resident philosophers can help identify the idea for us.

(April 30, 2014 at 7:37 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote:

(April 30, 2014 at 12:34 am)ChadWooters Wrote: Clever. Except you moved the goal post without addressing your unsupported premise that a god worthy of the name could fully conceive and create the fullness of reality free from suffering.

You're the one moving the goalposts. I should expect an all-knowing and all-powerful being should be able to conceive and construct, instantly and flawlessly, such a world, and to do so by expending no more effort than it takes for him to think about it. Your god has omni-qualities only when having them is convenient to your argument. When it's not, all of a sudden, he's got all of these little flaws, imperfections and incapabilities, things he can't do, rules he has to follow.

Your expectations about what God should be able to do are irrelevant. Either present a coherent example of perfect world or admit you're just a blowhard clinging to juvenile objections.

(April 30, 2014 at 9:25 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:

(April 30, 2014 at 7:37 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: You're the one moving the goalposts. I should expect an all-knowing and all-powerful being should be able to conceive and construct, instantly and flawlessly, such a world, and to do so by expending no more effort than it takes for him to think about it. Your god has omni-qualities only when having them is convenient to your argument. When it's not, all of a sudden, he's got all of these little flaws, imperfections and incapabilities, things he can't do, rules he has to follow.

Your expectations about what God should be able to do are irrelevant. Either present a coherent example of perfect world or admit you're just a blowhard clinging to juvenile objections.

A perfect world would be one free of any manner of anything anybody could ever possibly conceive of, or even imagine, as being negative. Which should be small beans for a perfect creator to do, but it's obviously way out of the league of the one you believe in.

Do you know why I have an expectation that your god is perfect and all-capable? Because you assfucks insist he is.