Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sure? This is CF, I thought this was implied?
I think you mean the "Christian image of God". I bring that up because there are other images of God where things are not predetermined.
Again, God already knows your final choice(s).
Christianity is a religion which, if true, renders our existence on earth pointless.
Tending toward Open Theism?I know it's a digression, so feel free to pass over, but I'm not convinced this is true.
Tending toward Open Theism?
Are you denying omniscience? If God doesn't know one's final choices, that might be because one asserts that the future is logically unknowable--ala open theism. If God simply doesn't know, but not for reasons of open theism, then he simply is not omniscient.Some might see it that way, but I don't.
Are you denying omniscience? If God doesn't know one's final choices, that might be because one asserts that the future is logically unknowable--ala open theism. If God simply doesn't know, but not for reasons of open theism, then he simply is not omniscient.
So how do you see it?
@Resha Caner, thank you for taking the trouble. I was genuinely curious. I wasn't so much trying to classify you as to get you to expound. When I was a Christian I wasn't too far from your positions.
As to the future existing, I think that if God is outside time, then the idea of the space-time continuum being complete is compelling. And since time seems to be part and parcel with space, suggesting God is bound to it or restricted by it or is bound to watch it unfold without knowing how or why, seems limiting however good his skills of prediction.
I guess when I say I wasn't too far from your position, I really mean that "defending the impossible" is a statement that resonates with me. To this day, if a fellow non-believer requires that omnipotence entails the ability to make a square circle, I tell him/her that that is silly. Omnipotence just entails the ability to do anything that is possible, those things that aren't logically contradictory. (Too, I don't know how if a god could do such a thing one could verify that he did it.)
Along similar lines, in recent years I've thought fallible limited gods more of a convincing idea than a multi-omni god. A god like Athena who might be persuaded to help and yet fail seems more "reasonable" than a god who could stop child-rape and yet doesn't.
Me? Sarcastic?Yeah, I'm sorry. When I reread my post I thought: wow that sounds overly defensive. You didn't do anything to prompt that. You always seem very polite … if maybe a little sarcastic at times.
Granted. I was attempting (when I was a Christian) to maintain God's transcendence. But how does a being outside time sequence his actions or thoughts.Bottom line: "God outside time" doesn't make sense to me. Rather, I would say God is time.
Me? Sarcastic?
Granted. I was attempting (when I was a Christian) to maintain God's transcendence. But how does a being outside time sequence his actions or thoughts.
Well, I went with god-time. As ex nihilo was a concept I abandoned for ex Deo, I conceived of time of our universe as a projection from God's own self-time--as a circle can be a projection of a sphere onto 2 dimensions. It could be considered as a necessary consequence of creation. So, not so much "God is time" as time is a necessary property of God's being.That's why "God is time" works so well.
Well, I went with god-time. As ex nihilo was a concept I abandoned for ex Deo, I conceived of time of our universe as a projection from God's own self-time--as a circle can be a projection of a sphere onto 2 dimensions. It could be considered as a necessary consequence of creation. So, not so much "God is time" as time is a necessary property of God's being.
Well I guess it goes both ways. Have you seen how many posts from believers question the motivations of non-believers?The most caustic of unbelievers here are so convinced I'm being deceitful, disingenuous, dishonest, etc. that being straight up honest sends them into a tizzy of confusion. The little devil sitting on my shoulder finds such aspects of human behavior fascinating.
Well I guess it goes both ways. Have you seen how many posts from believers question the motivations of non-believers?
Well, I went with god-time. As ex nihilo was a concept I abandoned for ex Deo, I conceived of time of our universe as a projection from God's own self-time--as a circle can be a projection of a sphere onto 2 dimensions. It could be considered as a necessary consequence of creation. So, not so much "God is time" as time is a necessary property of God's being.
Lack of evidence for any of my ideas let alone for the god I was attempting to understand.If you had all these things worked out, what led you away from Christianity?
Lack of evidence for any of my ideas let alone for the god I was attempting to understand.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?