Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Wee Frill revisited

Expand Messages
  • stoopidusmoronus
    First of all I m sorry it has taken me so long to respond. I ve got the same problem that you now have. I went to school and forgot about the existence of free
    Message 1 of 3377 , Oct 3, 2001
      First of all I'm sorry it has taken me so long to
      respond. I've got the same problem that you now have. I
      went to school and forgot about the existence of free
      time. :-) Well when you get a chance here's my
      responce. Finally. :-)<br><br><<it *is* true that God
      existed at time1 and that at time1, time2 did not happen.
      Even though for God all times are occuring at
      once>><br><br>No this is not true! That doesn't even make sence.
      Think about it. For God all times occur at once! How
      can you say that and then turn right around and say
      that a certian time happened before another one?
      Although once again I'll play along. :-) If your statement
      is true then so is this one God existed at time2 and
      that at time2, time1 did not happen. So the future can
      happen without a past to God. Does your argument still
      make sence to you?<br><br><<this is not the same
      for humans, who endure time the ol fashion
      way.>><br><br>Actually you seem to uncounsiously be giving God and
      humans the same method of dealing with time. You can't
      do that. I explain a little further on.
      :-)<br><br><<You can agree that if time2 hasn't happened, then it
      should not be set, right?>><br><br>Sure. But how
      do you define if it hasn't
      happened?<br><br><<I disagree with this as well, let me start off by
      making a few points clear:<br>- at points in the past,
      God has existed>><br><br>Correct, but this
      statement is more limited than reality obviously. :-)
      Remember it's all points not just points.<br><br><<-
      at any of these points, when God existed, he had
      thoughts about the future (because he is all knowing). He
      has thoughts about all times actually, but the future
      is what I am interested in now.>><br><br>This
      is not true. This is like claiming that you can be
      observing all of a line segment. And at the same time be at
      a specific point on the line segment you are
      observing having thoughts about another point. That is a
      complete paradox. He is at all points or no points, you
      cannot seperate them.<br><br><<- if God has a
      belief about the future, it in no circumstance can be
      wrong - there is no way that he can possibly hold a
      false belief.>><br><br>Once again you are trying
      to seperate one time from another. This works ONLY
      for humans. You cannot do the same for
      God!<br><br><<- the future has not happened, but it is impossible
      for it to not happen the way God thought it would,
      making everything predetermined.>><br><br>Ok I've
      heard an example before that I think is basically your
      position. The example I heard was specific to being
      predestined to be at a certian place at a certian time. So I
      will use that example but obviously it could work for
      anything eles as well. If you take a map (on a
      transparency) and mark where you are right now, and then x
      amount of time later on a new map mark where you are. If
      you stack all the maps in chronological order, and
      then look through the side of the stack you can see
      this very defined "worm" showing your physical path
      through time. So then by extrapolation, since God can see
      your entire stack everything you do must be
      predestined. Does that sound about right? I'll asumme it does.
      :-) I have two answers to this. One asuming this is
      true, God knows every single possible stack, so it
      really doesn't help you out any. However I like my other
      answer better. :-) When you talk about a stack as a
      definite defined object. To assume this you have to
      unconciously assume that our entire lives are somehow in God's
      past, because only the past is set. However God calls
      Himself I AM, he is in the "eternal present." Therefore
      instead of a set stack you have a fluid stack that is
      constantly changing with every descision you
      make.<br><br><<I think though, that you feel I am unfairly stating
      the argument because God exists at all
      times...><br><br>I do I tried to clarify. How did I
      do?<br><br><<In any event, it's fun to debate with you
      :)>><br><br>Glad you like it.
    • laura_87_2004
      I totally agree with you. I am not an athiest right now, but the only reason I went to church and prayed and things like that was because my parents told me
      Message 3377 of 3377 , Apr 27, 2002
        I totally agree with you. I am not an athiest right now, but the
        only reason I went to church and prayed and things like that was
        because my parents told me it was right. Now I'm on my search for a
        religion that fits me. But whenever I have kids I don't think that
        religion should be incorporated to them unless they are exposed to as
        many kinds as possible.




        --- In theteenatheists@y..., towsonatheist wrote:
        > When I was really little I believed in God, I was
        > raised Catholic (I'm 18 now and very much an atheist). I
        > think that teaching children anything like religious
        > beliefs when they're younger then four or so is very much
        > brainwashing especially if they're being told something way
        > beyond their understanding and they simply will believe
        > it if their parents tell them it.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.