.

.

@mdk My point has been consistent. The qualities and actions of the Judeo-Christian God are incompatible with the idea of free will. The qualities are omnipotence and omniscience, and the action is creating everything.

I am not opposed to the idea of God violating free will. However, I am opposed to the idea of God violating free will, then punishing their creations for doing exactly what they made them do. God sending people to Hell is unethical, because they had no choice but to sin, because God made them do it.

There's some unexpected depth in biblical allegories to address this. Specifically, you've presumably heard the story of Eve and the apple, right?

Well it wasn't (necessarily) an apple (sweet merciful christ why am I still talking about trees.......) It's described in Genesis as "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil," and God forbade Adam and Eve from eating it. Of course it was eaten anyway -- and you have to assume God knew that would happen, and allowed it to happen. But the depth here is applicable... we gained this knowledge through an act of free will, maybe the FIRST act of free will (maybe it's just another metaphor, Jesus was actually pretty big on those). From that moment on we're accountable for our knowledge -- we chose that accountability.

At least that's the story. Maybe food for thought.

ALTERNATIVELY -- let's think about the issue the other way around. Let's assume we have free will (I certainly feel like I do). Is the Judeo-Christian God wholly and completely incompatible with that?

.

@mdk Adam ate of the fruit because Eve convinced him, and she ate of the fruit and convinced Adam because the Serpent convinced her, and they convinced Eve because they rebelled against God out of a desire to surpass them. All of that happened because God created everything while knowing it would develop as such.

I was kinda going for the other.... but I take your point.

You want an obvious example of God violating free will? Go look up all of the times God hardened Pharaoh's heart when Moses asked him to let the Hebrews go. You obviously know how God "responded" to those "choices". It's not necessary for me to mention this to prove my point, because all you need to agree is to understand the consequences of God's described qualities and actions.

Well that was Moses' interpretation anyway, but yeah. God certainly can interfere. That's neat and all, I'm just much more fascinated that for the most part, he doesn't.

If we have free will, the Judeo-Christian God isn't omnipotent, omniscient, and the creator of everything, because those two conditions are mutually exclusive. You may feel like you have free will, but that could just be their will controlling your sentiments.

Could.

.

Well yeah, they've all been two-line quips that move the goalposts followed by "try again," there is a sort of consistency to that.

Perhaps the single most underrated comment uttered in this exchange.

.

I do not understand your sentence here, @catchamber. "If we have free will, the Judeo-Christian God isn't omnipotent, omniscient, and the creator of everything, because those two conditions are mutually exclusive."

Which two criteria are mutually exclusive? Free will and omnipotence, free will and omniscience or free will and being the creator of everything? I think regardless of the answer I'll have some other idea about that, but I should clarify first.

Oh hey, it's Sir Wall-O-Text McStrawManner. Did you have fun sitting on the sidelines after I pointed out your ridiculously ineffective attempt of a counterargument?

Catch, you're my boy, but refrain from calling the Cat-Man names. His long form posts are not the norm but there is nothing inheriantly wrong with writing like that.

@mdk@POOHEAD189@Heat@Mistiel@Burning Kitty



Hello Political Thread as mildly suggested by @Xandrya and echoed by @catchamber we wanted to attempt to engage this thread in a bit of voice chat debate as aposed to our usual text based snark matches.
Even if you aren't up for talking, joining a VC chat and just listening would be fine too. Maybe we will even find some common ground. (no really, it did wonders for me and @SleepingSilence)

Here is a link to my Extended RP Universe discord server, I'm aware we could use the RPG's official one but I have a few non-RP friends who would love to join and-or listen to us, so please join so I can assign you all roles and arrange a time.

Welcome!

Thanks for listening, you can all return to shitstorming in my thread as usual :)

@Penny and @The Harbinger of Ferocity are of course also welcome, I just didn't want to overload one post with too many mentions in case they didn't notify.

.

@catchamber Can you explain why they are mutually exclusive?

@Dynamo Frokane Not interested in listening or speaking. I get enough of that yelling at the liberal snowflake "news" reporters and Fox News. Then there is my polite discourse with coworkers who aren't liberal snowflake jerkwads with a telephone pole up their ass.

.

@Odin If you read this post, and all the posts I've made since then, I'm sure you'll find the answer to your question.

Oh, so you present me with an answer that amounts to 'read everything' while also asking for someone not to post a wall of text. You're a funny guy.

But the bible itself states we have free will. Mr. Adler dictates this quite clearly. Even more so, theologians agree that God creates a plan for everyone (and as such, is omniscient) but includes in this the ability to respond to his grace in a free manner. Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 600. Here you can read some more on interpretations of Gods view on free will.

So, if God is omnipotent, then it is within his abilities to create a laid out plan for everything and everyone whilst still including the free will element. It seems almost any 'problem' with religion can be explained away by saying he is omnipotent - it means he can do anything and we cannot understand how or why because we are not God.

@catchamber
I don't like strawman arguments either, but you make that point without name calling, just stick to attacking the arguments from here on out. You and Cat-man can be civil.

.