RE: Better reasons to quit Christianity
August 24, 2012 at 9:55 am
(This post was last modified: August 24, 2012 at 9:58 am by spockrates.)
(August 24, 2012 at 9:12 am)Rhythm Wrote:(August 24, 2012 at 7:27 am)spockrates Wrote: I don't see a problem given the proposed definitions of time and omniscience.
Time = that which is impossible to become static in the future
Omniscient = knowing all of the possible outcomes of the future and what actions would have to be taken to make the impossible, possible and make the possible, impossible.
You mean "given my bare assertions I don't see the problem".![]()
Your definition of time btw....utter garbage. Why is it that apologetics always hinges on creating a favorable (and often completely vapid) definition of a word to argue from? Amusingly, invoking a "changing timeline" and an omniscience that can see all these rivers of time still does not eliminate the problem. From the perspective of each individual timeline -once we have invoked precognition of the timelines- they are all as predetermined (you know...not static) as the monolithic and inevitable timeline we percieve. Troubling, isn't it? You seem to feel that by altering the vantage point of your precognitive observer you can avoid the problem posed by precognition. You cannot. As I have repeatedly explained, it isn't the observer, it isn't the observers vantage point, it is the very possibility of the having knowledge of the future which creates this issue.
I believe you missed my point. I'm not suggesting omniscience is knowing what will be; I'm wondering if omniscience is knowing what the possibilities are. The distinction between the actual and the possible is significant, I think. Also, whatever the outcome of our discussion, as I said before, I will not be troubled. I'm here to find out the truth about whether God exists, not to prove to anyone he does. The only one I'm trying to convince is myself.
(August 24, 2012 at 9:12 am)Rhythm Wrote:(August 24, 2012 at 7:27 am)spockrates Wrote: Now you say, "God is a precog."I most certainly do not. I'm explaining why this particular god is either -not a precog- or conversely, why the narrative about free will and it's attendant consequences is in error.
Sorry for being vague. I should have said, "You say, 'If there is a God who is a precog... .'"
"If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains (no matter how improbable) must be the truth."
--Spock
--Spock