Better reasons to quit Christianity

[The Grand Nudger]

There's the problem in this discussion. The logic can be flipped. The precog is incapable of experiencing what Joe does not choose.

And?

So they happen simultaneously (which correlates to God, since all times are the present for Him).

No, they do not, or the creature is not -PRE-cognitive. It matters very little what the creatures vantage point is when ours is that of linear progression. Again, that the precog -may not- be able to experience what Joe does not choose (I already explained a few ways in which the precog could btw) does not change the fact the Joe, in his linear waltz through the timeline, is incapable of choosing that which the precog did not experience.

We know this is true because the precog would not experience any choice unless Joe made a choice.

Except that Joe isn't making choices...sigh.

Joe cannot stray from the path of the precog,

Which is why calling Joe's actions "choice" is entirely ridiculous......

but the precog cannot stray from the path of Joe.

Which has nothing to do with whether or not Joe can be said to be making a "choice".

Circular. That's why I asked who determines reality. Joe does.

That should be easy to demonstrate. You're a Joe, determine reality for me?

If not, If he made a pre-determined choice (with no alternative), who or what determined that single path of reality?

Pancakes...again.

The timeline must begin.

Why must it, aren't you arguing for a god that experiences all things in the present?

Either at least one choice was made along the way (like creation), or everything, from the start of the universe down to me being in front of my laptop right now... is inevitable (again, circular- no cause).

No known cause, and you're ignoring something fairly obvious. If whatever set events in motion in this predestined universe was not a sentient creature no choice was made.

A cause does not happen without a choice--yours, or someone else's.

This is idiotic, does the sun "choose" to shine on the water, creating evaporation and eventually rain? No, it does not.

Now God, being a precog, knows his own decision before he makes it. Does that mean God never made a choice?
[

Yes, it does actually.

Or does the principle not apply to the same person? If not, why not? Use logic, not speculation, in your answer.

Wait just a minute, are you going to blather on about a god and then tell me not to speculate. Do you want to try this statement again? If not, I'm going to pull a goose and gander and request that you leave anything about your god out of the discussion....

Here's another way of looking at it. You're saying I'm bound to my precog, that I can only do what it experiences.

Yeah, so long as theres a precog you're bound to it. If you weren';t, the creature could not be said top be precognitive.

Why am I bound to my precog? Because it is right?

No, it has to be right to be called a precog, but that's not what binds you. As I've already explained, multiple times, it is the requirements of precognition as an ability that would bind you. For there to be precogs it must be possible to know the future. You cannot know something that has not been set.

That's like saying I'm bound to the truth, that I can only do what I'm going to do--I can only fulfill reality. Well of course I can only carry out reality. That doesn't mean I don't have choices within reality, that I can't change it.

If the future is set you cannot change it, by definition. You know, predestined events.

A precog knows reality. I create reality, or someone does.

Find that someone and you might have an argument.

Just toss out the notion of a precog altogether.

I would, and I suggested that you do the same a loooong way back.

If it is only an observer, 'reality' and 'precog' are interchangeable.

Didn't we just toss out the precog? No, they arean't.

Because as you said, a precog doesn't cause anything in me. Nor does the act of its knowing change anything (as would knowing only the inevitable). It is therefore synonymous with reality.

Except that it isn't sysnonymous wioth reality. FFS. How many times do I have to say this to you. Whether or not a precog influences you or events has no bearing on the concept I've explained to you -at length..

So your idea of a precog exists in the atheistic here and now.

No, there are no known precognitive entities in human experience, not in the "atheist" or "Theistic", not in the here and now, not in the past.

Yet we make choices. Or do we?

Precisely the problem...even in the absence of a precognitive, even in the absence of a divine creature, predestined events (a requirement for precognition) erode the concept of choice even when there is no one to observe them.

---

Please tell me, Rythm:

Am i understanding you correctly? Are you saying that a precognitive being who sees the future (if such were possible) would make the outcomes to become static, rather than dynamic, and so freewill would become an illusion?

Both of you are barking up the same godamned tree. The precog need have no effect. The precog need have no other ability than to observe. It is the ability to observe the future itself that creates this problem, not the precog who has the ability. They do not have to "force" events to conform to their visions, nor do their visions have to "force" time to become static. Their experiences must be accurate, or they are not precogntive. For a precognitive to have knowledge of the future, it must be possible to have knowledge of the future. It is not possible to have knowledge of what is not yet determined.

Since you both seem to be having immense amounts of trouble with this simple concept lets try an example that does not involve a precog:

I have in my hands, right now, a glass filled with water. I am going to turn this glass upside down. What do you think will happen? Predict the future for me.