ispoketoanangel wrote:
I don't try to convince anyone. Most theists engaged in a discussion with atheists are simply defending their point of view, which is under attack.

Poor baby. Poor widdle chwistian, always under attack by the big meanie atheists.

Really, part of the vast majority of privileged people who are granted undeserved respect just because they happen to be believers, who get to set the terms of discussion in politics, education, business, so that christians are unthinkingly favored and atheists are at best marginalized and at worst hunted and thrown out of any position of influence. Oh yeah you should open discussions from the point of view that you are under attack. When the USA has an atheist president, then come back here and tell us you're under attack and you might deserve the tiniest bit of sympathy.

I constantly see the objection that God doesn't give enough evidence for his existence, and that a loving god would give more evidence. Molinism answers this objection.

Except it doesn't, as has already been explained to you. And your refusal to admit it has something to do with you not wanting to admit that the god you choose to worship is a complete dickhead. That is, if it existed and behaved the way you believe it behaves, it would be a complete dickhead.

Now about that evidence again. What's your evidence for god ? Video ? Audio recording ? God's fingerprints on your doorknob ? Angel feathers dropped behind your bed ?

Oh, you again.

Molinism = more apologist nonsense.

hotshoe wrote:

ispoketoanangel wrote:
I don't try to convince anyone. Most theists engaged in a discussion with atheists are simply defending their point of view, which is under attack.

Poor baby. Poor widdle chwistian, always under attack by the big meanie atheists.

Really, part of the vast majority of privileged people who are granted undeserved respect just because they happen to be believers, who get to set the terms of discussion in politics, education, business, so that christians are unthinkingly favored and atheists are at best marginalized and at worst hunted and thrown out of any position of influence. Oh yeah you should open discussions from the point of view that you are under attack. When the USA has an atheist president, then come back here and tell us you're under attack and you might deserve the tiniest bit of sympathy.

I constantly see the objection that God doesn't give enough evidence for his existence, and that a loving god would give more evidence. Molinism answers this objection.

Except it doesn't, as has already been explained to you. And your refusal to admit it has something to do with you not wanting to admit that the god you choose to worship is a complete dickhead. That is, if it existed and behaved the way you believe it behaves, it would be a complete dickhead.

Now about that evidence again. What's your evidence for god ? Video ? Audio recording ? God's fingerprints on your doorknob ? Angel feathers dropped behind your bed ?

All I said is that the theistic point of view is under attack. Or challenged, if you prefer. I'm not playing the victim by saying that so I don't know where you get the idea I want sympathy.

The evidence for most Christians is that God has revealed himself to them, and there is a variety of philosophical arguments to back up that experience.

hackenslash wrote:Omniscience and free will cannot exist in the same universe.

That's an elementary error of logic. There is no contradiction with God knowing what we would freely do under certain circumstances.

UnderConstruction wrote:
No, it really does not. Because as you have presented it here, it also carries with it some very severe limitations to skydaddy's power. Besides the inherent conflicts between omnipotence and omnicience, this "omnipotent" being is really incapable of convincing even one fence sitter? That would make him inferior to a skilled human orator.

Of course God is capable to convince all humans of his existence. But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him. In order to respect our freedom, God is limited in what is logically possible for him to do, otherwise it would interfere with our freedom.

You just came up with that as you were writing it, innit?

ispoketoanangel wrote:

hackenslash wrote:Omniscience and free will cannot exist in the same universe.

That's an elementary error of logic. There is no contradiction with God knowing what we would freely do under certain circumstances.

Yes, there is.

If God knows with absolute certainty (part of the job description for an omniscient being) what you will do before you do it, you will be unable to do anything other that what God has foreseen. You may not feel any force guiding but your actions are no less predetermined for all that.

But your argument here goes one step further. Our actions are predetermined to the point that even God cannot change them. This is arguably the case anyway but you are bringing this issue to the forefront for our attention. God becomes impotent because he cannot even change the predetermined course of a single human being, whether they are a die-hard atheist or merely a fence sitter.

But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him.

No pressure guys, but if you don't believe, love and worship me YOU 'LL BURN IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!

Now love me, please.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. I guess you are no different to the other theists who come here to preach to us.

Oh well, here goes.

ispoketoanangel wrote:
Of course God is capable to convince all humans of his existence.

Point of order but you said:

For God knows exactly how we would react if we would have more evidence

Therefore God already knows how we will react and is unable to change it, otherwise he would not know how we would react.

But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him.

Kind of difficult to love someone/thing that you have no reason to believe exists. Since that is the reason most of us do not subscribe to any of your kooky little, sky daddy worshipping cults, that would seem to be a sticking point that would need to be overcome, should this entityt genuinely have any interest in out freely loving him.

In order to respect our freedom, God is limited in what is logically possible for him to do, otherwise it would interfere with our freedom.

An omnipotent God is limited in what he can do. Gotcha.

But I think you will find us unmoved by attempts to erect the usual false dichotomy of intervention versus free will. Can a parent respect the free will of their child, whilst providing guidance, protection and (when required) discipline?

UnderConstruction wrote:

ispoketoanangel wrote:

hackenslash wrote:Omniscience and free will cannot exist in the same universe.

That's an elementary error of logic. There is no contradiction with God knowing what we would freely do under certain circumstances.

Yes, there is.

If God knows with absolute certainty (part of the job description for an omniscient being) what you will do before you do it, you will be unable to do anything other that what God has foreseen. You may not feel any force guiding but your actions are no less predetermined for all that.

You will be unable to do anything other than what you will freely choose to do. There is no contradiction, it just means you can't do more 1 thing at once.

I just have to say, I know it's OT, but ispoketoanangel's handle makes me think of this:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csATriX8Ed0[/youtube]
YOU'RE WELCOME.

babel wrote:

But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him.

No pressure guys, but if you don't believe, love and worship me YOU 'LL BURN IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!

Now love me, please.

If God exists and if God is perfect (and that is what Christians believe), then whatever his decisions will be will be fair. The rest is just speculation. Christians trust God will make everything right at the end.

ispoketoanangel wrote:

You will be unable to do anything other than what you will freely choose to do. There is no contradiction, it just means you can't do more 1 thing at once.

How did you get so smart? I've been starting to consider this religion thing after reading your posts.

ispoketoanangel wrote:

UnderConstruction wrote:

ispoketoanangel wrote:

hackenslash wrote:Omniscience and free will cannot exist in the same universe.

That's an elementary error of logic. There is no contradiction with God knowing what we would freely do under certain circumstances.

Yes, there is.

If God knows with absolute certainty (part of the job description for an omniscient being) what you will do before you do it, you will be unable to do anything other that what God has foreseen. You may not feel any force guiding but your actions are no less predetermined for all that.

You will be unable to do anything other than what you will freely choose to do. There is no contradiction, it just means you can't do more 1 thing at once.

Wrong. If I have to make a decision as of right now whether to do one of two things, God already knows which one I will pick. If this is true, my notion of free will is an illusion as I cannot do anything but what God (as an omniscient being) already knows I will.

ispoketoanangel wrote:

babel wrote:

But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him.

No pressure guys, but if you don't believe, love and worship me YOU 'LL BURN IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!

Now love me, please.

If God exists and if God is perfect (and that is what Christians believe), then whatever his decisions will be will be fair. The rest is just speculation. Christians trust God will make everything right at the end.

You mean he didn't make it right at the beginning?

ispoketoanangel wrote:

babel wrote:

But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him.

No pressure guys, but if you don't believe, love and worship me YOU 'LL BURN IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!

Now love me, please.

If God exists and if God is perfect (and that is what Christians believe), then whatever his decisions will be will be fair. The rest is just speculation. Christians trust God will make everything right at the end.

You didn't react to what I wrote.
You can't put a gun to somebody's head and demand they love you truthfully. If you have to use a threat to make someone love you, how is that 'freely'?

I also noticed you used quite some 'if' in that sentence. If pigs could fly, the rain would stink from time to time.

UnderConstruction wrote:

Therefore God already knows how we will react and is unable to change it, otherwise he would not know how we would react.

Yes, for some people it might be that god is unable to change it. But it doesn't mean that God is not omnipotent, just that it's not logically possible for God to make some people freely love him.

Kind of difficult to love someone/thing that you have no reason to believe exists. Since that is the reason most of us do not subscribe to any of your kooky little, sky daddy worshipping cults, that would seem to be a sticking point that would need to be overcome, should this entityt genuinely have any interest in out freely loving him.

The point is that God knows how you would react if you had more evidence, and it might be that you would still freely reject him if you had more evidence, so he doesn't provide more evidence to you because there is no need to.

An omnipotent God is limited in what he can do. Gotcha.

Yes. The standard definition of omnipotent accepted now is that God can do everything that is logically possible.

Tbickle wrote:

ispoketoanangel wrote:

babel wrote:

But God's purpose isn't that we know he exists, but that we freely love him.

No pressure guys, but if you don't believe, love and worship me YOU 'LL BURN IN HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!

Now love me, please.

If God exists and if God is perfect (and that is what Christians believe), then whatever his decisions will be will be fair. The rest is just speculation. Christians trust God will make everything right at the end.

You mean he didn't make it right at the beginning?

ispoketoanangel wrote:You will be unable to do anything other than what you will freely choose to do. There is no contradiction, it just means you can't do more 1 thing at once.

I think you will find omniscience is more than just a restriction on one's ability to multi-task. Though frequent demonstrations of said multi-tasking ability by many human beings make a mockery of this assertion regardless.

And yet what you will freely choose to do has already been predetermined, since if it had not, skypappy could not have perfect knowledge of how we will act (still part of that omniscience thingamajiggy).

To pick a trivial example, will I have toast or muesli for breakfast tomorrow morning (that I will likely ave neither is beside the point). Up until the point that I consume one of these breakfast foodstuffs, I will have the illusion of being able to choose which I will ultimately eat. However, God already knows I will eat the toast (for the sake of argument). No matter how much I might think I have a say in the matter and no matter how mch I um and ah over this most important of decisions, I will eat the toast. God has foreseen it. If God is omniscient, it cannot end any other way.

And yes, he will also foresee such events as me putting a spoonfull of muesli into my mouth, chewing it then spitting it out and going to make some toast instead. This does not change the outcome.