Origins of life

[Linn]

By the way, this thread should be renamed "Bible Study," since that's basically what it is.
_________________

perhaps, but we are dicussing life really, and I think a good
discussion is in under way, both sides of the coin U know?

I am tired of the bible thumpers, you think this forum does it?
Hell no this forum is civilized and polite, as mature discussions

And..points always get brought up that the bible is not sientific, but as we have brought out that it is, just as the Greek thinkers were in their day, so too was moses and other writers, as I have brought out, fr the "times" that they lived they had extraordinary thinking, and an understanding of science.

is creation true? then its important to discuss it.
isevolution true? then discuss that too.
Or is it a combination of the two?
The latter is what I am prone to believe.

RE: your referal to the skin disease, just to clarify.
R U refering to the apocolyp prophecy?

[alextemplet]

RE: your referal to the skin disease, just to clarify.
R U refering to the apocolyp prophecy?

Yeah, that's what I was talking about, the mark of the beast described in Revelations.

I don't think we're Bible thumping, but we do keep bringing it up. I wonder how this fits into the ban on religious discussion. I guess the mods are going to allow this one, as long as we keep our religious chit chat inside this particular thread.

[Linn]

Well I am not talking about religion per say,
but that as a believer in ID, I want to make a
case that the bible does have validity, as a credable
source, and scientific points.

[damien james]

f you tell me today that you're going to kill someone tomorrow, am I guilty of the murder?

That is not example I used. Here is mine:

if I were about to beget a child knowing beforehand he would be a homicidal maniac, would I not be ultimately responsible for his crimes?

Yes, I would be ultimately responsible for his crimes already knowing outcome.

And concept of free will is no longer relevant once future outlook has been forseen. If God is omniscient, he knows exactly what will happen before action is completed, therefore, path has already been set, negating free will.

This was my argument from beginning. If path is already set having already been observed before hand, then those who are blessed with salvation or doomed to damnation are known to God before having ever been born.

Of course, this is only case with truly omniscient God.

[Linn]

Linn wrote:
RE: your referal to the skin disease, just to clarify.
R U refering to the apocolyp prophecy?

Yeah, that's what I was talking about, the mark of the beast described in Revelations.

trying to be a wise guy ha?

[alextemplet]

Damien, the two examples are the same. In both it is known that a crime will be committed beforehand, and in both cases it is the fault of the person committing that crime and no one else. Our paths are not set in stone but completely up to us to decide. God knowing what we will choose beforehand does not negate our free will anymore than me knowing which road you will take to drive to a city negates your free will. Even though I may know beforehand which path you will take, it is still you that takes that path and not I.

Linn, if you weren't talking about Revelations, what mark were you talking about? The mark of Cain?

[damien james]

Alex, the two examples are not the same or I would have not re-issued my example. In my example, I express certainty of a situation by making the Father omniscient. In your example, one person merely tells the other what he will do, but there is no actual knowledge of the future implied, only a statement from the would be killer. See the difference?

Also, just knowing outcome of a situation with certainty (i.e. the omniscience of God) is influence on the situation. See relativity. This is why with an omniscient God there is no true free will. Free will would imply that the outcome of my choice is not known before hand.

And if God knows what I will do before I do it, then he knows whether my path will lead to salvation or not. Therefore, he has the option before hand to make sure I will not even be born.

If God knows that a group of children will end up with terminal illnesses and die in a children's hospital through no fault of their own, then he has option to make sure their situation will never arise.

If God knows the outcome of the Rwandan genocide, then he has option of making sure it never takes place.

Because to the omniscient God the specific outcomes of these situations have been determined, AND he has the power to make sure they do not take place, you can say that he is responsible.

Your argument seems to rest on human beings being able to choose their destiny. My argument is that in the presence of an omniscient God, there is no actual choice involved, and no true free will. If there was, then future is unable to be forseen in advance.

You see, it is important to understand that just the mere observation of an event, even if that event is in future, sets the path for that particular event.

If this to be true:

Our paths are not set in stone but completely up to us to decide

then there cannot have been observation of future events, hence, no omniscient God.

[Linn]

Hi Damien

perhaps you missed my post
God can Choose to look or not.
Just as you can choose what you want to
watch on tv or not watch it,
or turn it off etc
first you turn on the tv, then choose what to watch
you have the ability,but can choose to use it.
God makes selective and discretioary use of his ability,
If he didnt then as Alex pointed out we would not have
free will.
Example: Genesis 18:20,21
If you had this ability wouldnt you do the same?

There are some things I have the capability to
know but chhose not to.

if you could see your future right now,
and when you will die and how,
would you want to know?
I sure would not.

Case in point is my superstitious mother in law who went to
a fortune teller who told her a family member was going
to die in a red car,
guess whos car she REFUSES to get in to?

time travel involves the use of speed, so he
engage that process if he wants.

Also God can discern things too as to the
outcome of something just as a loving father
knows by how his kid acts the outcome of such actions.

And we also have the tech to see our unborn
baby in the womb
and determine his sex, When the doctor asks :
"do you want to know?"
many choose to wait to see and be surprised,
Maybe God is like that, and when we do well he feels
happiness because he did not know ahead. And when
humans "fill the world with violence", he is deeply grieved.

[damien james]

If God has chosen not to look, then he is not All Knowing, therefore not omniscient.

[Linn]

If God has chosen not to look, then he is not All Knowing, therefore not omniscient.

me gives up
you dont get it so be it

[alextemplet]

I agree with Linn. God does know what will happen, but if He did choose to alter our choices - as damien seems to think He might - then He would destroy free will. Just because He knows what we're going to do doesn't mean that we aren't the ones responsible for doing it. The very fact that God allows both good and bad to coexist should prove that there is free will. If there wasn't, evil would not exist.

But yeah, I think this is going to be another one of those "I'm right!"/"No I'm right!" x 1000 repititions debate so I guess I'll just leave it at that. If you choose to disagree that's up to you, not me, because you have that free will!

Sorry, that last one was kind of corny, I know, forgive me.

[Linn]

NO Alex, your wrong!!!

It's bla bla bla bla remember?
Ill never forget that cause when you said that I was lMAO!
you should come on here a little bzed more often.

reminds me, I haven't had a beer in ...???
a while, time I did.

OOPs mitril mod will scold us if we chit chat off topic,
shhhh
(sneaking)