(July 11, 2015 at 10:16 am)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 10, 2015 at 10:25 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: You didn't attempt to answer the question at all. You just used semantics to move the goalposts.
(July 10, 2015 at 10:58 pm)Pizza Wrote: Then he plays definition lawyer with the word "dodging." That's kind of funny.
(July 11, 2015 at 5:03 am)Neimenovic Wrote: if you're saying that ndes are the way god reveals himself now, how does that not violate our free will?
And btw, a propos the head spinning thing.....didn't you say that creating us unable to sin would violate our free will? How is creating us unable to spin our heads any different?
God created us as finite beings.
If we assume that any and every limitation that we experience is a violation of our free will, then we arrive at the conclusion that because God did not create us as infinite, limitless beings, he has somehow violated our free will. IOW, he would have had to create us AS GODS like himself.
But God is not created and has no beginning. So, even if He created us as "gods", the fact that we were not uncreated beings would be argued as a violation of our free will because we would will to be uncreated and without origin.
I'm sure that philosophers could reason their way out of this far better than I can, but the problem is not with my answer but with a logical contradiction within the question.
So we don't have free will.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
