How can God regret if he knows the future?

[dcalling]

Not even God?

I believe so.

And the question can be generalized to "Can God create something that he don't know". And I believe the answer is yes.

We can apply this to ourselves as well, it is always great to create computer games that are hard to guess

 

[ximmix]

I believe so.

Pls clarify, you believe he can or you believe he can't?

 

[dcalling]

Pls clarify, you believe he can or you believe he can't?

I thought I made it very clear. God can create something he can't predict, so there could (this is only my own opinion) be things that he does not know.

 

[muichimotsu]

What your describing or refuting is pretty much Calvinism, God hasn’t forced you to commit sin or do right upon conception, humanity has free will and God’s judgement acts in accordance with that will, judgement has been rendered in accordance with humanities will, it doesn’t force the will of humanity to either condemnation or salvation. God hasn’t already pre-condemned or saved anyone from birth. Your objection is only valid if I affirm that free will doesn’t exist like in Calvinism.

How can God be said to be almighty if it merely responds to human will? The whole thing smacks of Neil Gaiman's American Gods in that gods are contingent upon the faith of humans and as it falters, so does the power of those gods, new ones taking their place

The whole thing just makes God out to be little more than an advanced program that somehow made humans and yet is subject to that will, making the whole situation a contradiction of cosmic proportions

 

[muichimotsu]

You are entitled to what you think. I am only here to inform you that there could be someone much smarter than us that is doing something we don't understand.

And so what if that's the case? It doesn't mean they're worthy of worship, because intelligence /=/ wisdom

 

[muichimotsu]

True but they also have to acknowledge that they might not be correct due to the limitation of their current knowledge.

And thus by that standard, the apologist for God could very well be wrong that the God they believe in exists or any God at all. Otherwise, you're not being honest or consistent

 

[Barney2.0]

How can God be said to be almighty if it merely responds to human will? The whole thing smacks of Neil Gaiman's American Gods in that gods are contingent upon the faith of humans and as it falters, so does the power of those gods, new ones taking their place

You seem to be confusing a respect for free will with forced contingency. He responds to human will when interacting with humans, if he doesn’t respond to human will, then there can be no real interaction between God and man. God doesn’t have to interact with people nor save them, he saves man because he wants to save man, not because he needs too, a quick example of this is when Christ says “unless you believe I AM he you will die in your sins” which is in John 8:24. God is not contingent on man, man is contingent on God, and God in his own love chooses to interact with man without violating their capacity for choice based on his own contingency to his own attributes such as being omnipotent. God does not need man’s faith, men are contingent on God whether they like it or not, God is not contingent on men, God is however contingent on his own will to save mankind from sin and grant them everlasting life.

The whole thing just makes God out to be little more than an advanced program that somehow made humans and yet is subject to that will, making the whole situation a contradiction of cosmic proportions

Your again conflating actions that God does in accordance to human choice with subjection to human will, the two are not the same. God doesn’t need to save all men, he chooses too, God does not serve men, he grants them their merits according to their choices not their wants. For example the merits of sin are death, God will allow that to take place if man chooses it and he did, however that does not mean he forced it upon man, man chose it and got what he chose. God in response due to being omnipotent will give us a second chance at regaining what we lost through his Begotten Son Christ eternal. God is contingent on himself not on anyone else, just because man fell into sin and chose sin which God allowed that does not mean that God has to be forced to sit back and watch.

 

[dcalling]

And so what if that's the case? It doesn't mean they're worthy of worship, because intelligence /=/ wisdom

You have to look at the Bible, and see the message of God yourself. Start with the 10 commandments, i.e. no idol worshiping, honor your parents, no adultery, murder, stealing, covet, to the most important law of all, Love God with all and love your neighbor as yourself.

And thus by that standard, the apologist for God could very well be wrong that the God they believe in exists or any God at all. Otherwise, you're not being honest or consistent

I could definitely wrong about God, since I am limited. But I will say giving all the evidence, the probability of a creator is extremely high. Would like to know what you believe in (you set it as Buddhist, so you must believe in spiritual world, just not a creator?)

 

[ximmix]

I thought I made it very clear. God can create something he can't predict, so there could (this is only my own opinion) be things that he does not know.

In that case God isn't omniscient.

 

[ximmix]

This is because you don't believe in after life. death in this world is not a finish, it is more like a timeout

I just find it quite funny when religious people tell me, that I as an atheist lead an empty and pointless life with no meaning. When it is actually the religious people who think this life has no value, it's the afterlife that means everything. Im sure every atheist here treasures and makes the most of this short life we have...

 

[ximmix]

I thought I made it very clear. God can create something he can't predict, so there could (this is only my own opinion) be things that he does not know.

So God is not all knowing then

 

[ximmix]

God created the universe with freedom of events, and created free will. God at first appreciated creation, and later corrected it, but three child bearing families survived.

Really, and you have support in the Bible for that?

 

[ximmix]

take care eveyone, in these troubled times...

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

Really, and you have support in the Bible for that?

In Genesis Elohim says and behold it was good. Later He sends a flood. Noah's three sons and their wives repopulate the Earth.

 

[ximmix]

In Genesis Elohim says and behold it was good. Later He sends a flood. Noah's three sons and their wives repopulate the Earth.

Were their wives on the ark really? can u show me a quote from the Bible that supports that?

 

[ximmix]

In Genesis Elohim says and behold it was good. Later He sends a flood. Noah's three sons and their wives repopulate the Earth.

Ok, so nothing from the Bible to support ur claim that the wives were actually on the ark?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Were their wives on the ark really? can u show me a quote from the Bible that supports that?

Genesis 7:7

 

[ximmix]

Ok, so nothing from the Bible to support ur claim that the wives were actually on the ark?

Ok an honest queston, because i don't know. Accoording to the Bible, how many people were on the boat?

 

[ximmix]

Genesis 7:7

Tnx.

 

[muichimotsu]

You seem to be confusing a respect for free will with forced contingency. He responds to human will when interacting with humans, if he doesn’t respond to human will, then there can be no real interaction between God and man. God doesn’t have to interact with people nor save them, he saves man because he wants to save man, not because he needs too, a quick example of this is when Christ says “unless you believe I AM he you will die in your sins” which is in John 8:24. God is not contingent on man, man is contingent on God, and God in his own love chooses to interact with man without violating their capacity for choice based on his own contingency to his own attributes such as being omnipotent. God does not need man’s faith, men are contingent on God whether they like it or not, God is not contingent on men, God is however contingent on his own will to save mankind from sin and grant them everlasting life.

So God is still intrinsically limited to action based on relationality?

If God is omnipotent, then God necessarily would have to be able to affect free will, your argument would appear to be God chooses not to, which gets into questions of God's perfection if it has to deliberate and choose anything

Yeah, bald assertions about what you believe to be fact don't make it so, your convictions are irrelevant to truth, especially if you can't demonstrate it and boil it down to veiled threats of God's power and necessity. If God is contingent, though, can God be said to be a perfect being?

Your again conflating actions that God does in accordance to human choice with subjection to human will, the two are not the same. God doesn’t need to save all men, he chooses too, God does not serve men, he grants them their merits according to their choices not their wants. For example the merits of sin are death, God will allow that to take place if man chooses it and he did, however that does not mean he forced it upon man, man chose it and got what he chose. God in response due to being omnipotent will give us a second chance at regaining what we lost through his Begotten Son Christ eternal. God is contingent on himself not on anyone else, just because man fell into sin and chose sin which God allowed that does not mean that God has to be forced to sit back and watch.

Is God not subject to anything at all or only what would be permitted so you don't make it a despot?

Not sure why the merits of sin is death except because of the bible claiming as such, that's circular logic

I cannot choose my own death, that assumes I somehow have that spiritual sense to be able to discern an afterlife or a god, neither of which I've ever had any such experiences

If God is contingent on itself, then that seems to make the omnipotence combined with omniscience allow God to be a despot and no one could challenge it; essentially might makes right, a variant on the Euthypro dilemma, where God is conflated with goodness to avoid that dichotomy brought up of whether something is good because God says so or because it is good in itself apart from God?