> if God is all-powerful, he cannot be all-good. And if he is all-good, then he cannot be all-powerful.
Kino
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
> if God is all-powerful, he cannot be all-good.
> if God is all-powerful, he cannot be all-good. And if he is all-good, then he cannot be all-powerful.
Kino
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
can't have good without bad
God gave us free choice.
Everything else is down to us.
God also said "If you've been a c**t(atheist) all your life, I have given you a key to the door that brings you back to me, and all you have to do is use it."
PICREL: your choice.
>saving goatse on your PC to own the queers
Average tradcath in 2024
>Be on Cinemaphile
>Don't have multiple GOATSE's saved on multiple hard drives for redundance
You're an immense homosexual son.
Just the pic of the whole post? Because the whole post really shoves it in there.
Brainlet detected.
Me knowing that you are going to die-l8 your micropeener-shit-tube-front-hole tonight doesn't affect your choice to do it. You make that choice bro.
Knowing the future and free choice are not mutually exclusive, especially when I know the future, but you are the one that makes the choice. Right up until the millisecond you make the choice, you are free to make a different choice. But nooooooo, despite all the advice, you decided to chop bits off your body. YU.
Good thing Christ never said to follow his example of kindness and just vaguely hinted about triggering gays and trannies on anime websites.
Nice to meet a fellow Bible Scholar.
God be with you.
I’m taping this in front of my local Catholic Church
You can’t have free choice with an omniscient God since God would then have the ability to see the future therefore future is predestined therefore we have no choice
>god knows if you're going to go left or right so the choice was never yours
what? how?
Yeah… if time is linear than every action has a reaction which has to be qualified into the greater timeline. Going left may have profound differences from going right which could askew the timeline so EVERY decision has to be qualified so there was never really a decision in the first place.
But you’re just homosexual troll LARPers on Cinemaphile trying to get internet brownie points by “triggering da atheists, owning da atheists” so quite frankly idgaf
Thread hidden and herbed
>Fedora
>Runs from argument while also committing numerous fedora sins (logical fallacies)
Many such cases!
>Game theory
Interactions between individuals in the context of a game aren't comparible to the interactions between humans and the Abrahamic understanding of God. This comparison might work for something like the Greek pantheon though
Nothing you said means anything.
But time is linear.
So are you saying everything is preordained but at the same time you dont believe in God?
Not him but you don't need God to have everything predetermined.
It's all just one big chemical reaction, you can map out the whole thing with math. I mean I personally can't because it's too big and I'm bad at math, but the concept is that it's just one big line of dominoes.
But then the argument changes from "god is bad because he determines everything which is bad" to "everythings just predetermind which is bad".
the "argument" is in how free will and omniscience are contradictory concepts. Can't have one with the other.
Legit, I dont think Im smart enough to understand that.
Omniscience on the part of one party is not mutually exclusive with the freedom of choice of the other party that is not omniscient.
then god didn't create the universe.
Non-sequitor.
see
You're just proving you can't understand the argument or map the connections.
Then explain it for a poor fool.
>If I know what someone is going to do, they didn't choose to do it
Very flawed reasoning. Go back to philosophy 101 and start over
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomb%27s_paradox
Average atheist midwit
Then I have to kill you with a hammer, sorry bud, I have no choice.
God invented time, he is no slave to causality.
>yes, god can create a rock too heavy for him to lift, but he can also lift it
>Everything else is down to us.
But he literally set every single thing in your life, every choice you're ever going to have, every mood you'll ever have, every hot cocoa you thought was safe enough to sip but wasn't.
Plus consider this: Unironically and without memeing, no one deliberately makes bad choices.
You ALWAYS think the thing you've chosen is reasonable and correct at the time, even when your thought process is "That seemed like the best chance I had" or "It's the thing I really wanted even though I knew I shouldn't"; you chose that weed needle because not choosing it was more painful and thus the worse choice.
It's ONLY when you have hindsight and more information do you then choose something different, that is the nature of regret.
>he literally set every single thing in your life
No he didn't. That's exactly what 'You have free choice' means.
If I give a meth addict $20 to get some food, I know exactly what they are going to do with that $20. The meth-head has the freedom to choose up until the moment he hands that $20 over.
>no one deliberately makes bad choices
Agreed except in some cases people do but let's ignore them for the moment to avoid a side-track.
If I see you are making a dumb choice and advise against but you still do, that's totally your choice, including to ignore the good advice.
>ONLY when you have hindsight
Hindsight is 20:20 is the aphorism, except for when you know what is going to happen but still do it anyway.
That's the principle behind 'sinning' - it's excusable the first time because you don't know better, but if you keep doing it knowing the consequences then you are 'actively sinning'.
I like that you need to compare people in general to drug addicts in order to come up with something resembling an argument that allows free will to exist with an omniscient god.
The anon he responded to brought it up.
Being a bit disingenuous there.
I'm giving an illustration where one party (me) knows what is going to happen, but the other party (methy) still has complete freedom to choose. However I am not omniscient so I don't know what choice he makes.
If you accept you have complete freewill, you are taking back the power over the direction in your life. It's a good idea bro.
Otherwise your choices mean nothing because you always have the 'not my fault it's god's fault excuse, so why not make the bad choices' despite the fact that God said 'don't do it bro, it'll frick you up' about a lot of things.
Did you create the drug addict? Did you create the drug? Did you create every physical law? Are you responsible for everything that has or will happen in the addict's life?
Then you're the one being disingenuous, as you're ignoring the core of the argument.
Man created or extracted the drug so 'freewill'
The drug addict chooses to take the drug, so 'freewill'
The drug addict chooses no to rehab, so 'freewill'.
I don't have to be omniscient to know what he will do with the $20.
You seem to be a bit upset. It's alright dude, no one is perfect and everyone struggles to get to the truth. The important thing is that you engage with that struggle.
>listen I just created reality and all the laws that govern it, how every cell in your body acts and reacts, its not my fault that you travel along the pathway of cause and effect I created
its explained a number of ways in the thread, the responses are "but I did have breakfast" level.
>(If)Omniscience on the part of one party is not mutually exclusive with the freedom of choice of the other party that is not omniscient........................(then) god didn't create the universe.
That is a classic non-sequitor.
Explain it or admit that your statement does not logically follow the first statement.
BTW: Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
omniscient
/ɒmˈnJsJənt/
adjective
knowing everything.
"a third-person omniscient narrator"
> Knowing everything
Does not mean 'Controlling everything and forcing choices. That is exactly whar 'free to choose' is about Freewill = free to choose according to your will.
Anyway explain away dude...
>non-sequitur
see
>Tell me a reason to have them that doesn't turn into circular reasoning
>Circular posts back to post that completely avoids the question.
LOL, OK, I see you can't answer.
Thanks for playing homosexual.
>"but I did have breakfast"
But imagine if you didn't
> I don't have freewill
But imagine if you did.
I do have free will though, because god doesn't exist.
Then why are you complaining on here about your shitty choices?
It's not a blog you know?
why are you projecting?
The free will vs omniscience bit is just a fun way to get people engaged in the "can god make rock too heavy" "debate."
great, now i cant stop thinking about doing cocaine
Apparently that's Gods fault.
people do things they know are the wrong decision all the time. look at alcoholics. your socratic theory of morals is moronic
>Plus consider this: Unironically and without memeing, no one deliberately makes bad choices.
>You ALWAYS think the thing you've chosen is reasonable and correct at the time, even when your thought process is "That seemed like the best chance I had" or "It's the thing I really wanted even though I knew I shouldn't"; you chose that weed needle because not choosing it was more painful and thus the worse choice
You're actually expressing an idea made famous by Saint Thomas Aquinas, possibly the most significant and respected Catholic theologian and philosopher in history.
Yes, our will can only actively pursue things that we deem to be good somehow. But just because we perceive good in something doesn't mean that it's the right thing to choose. Adultery comes with a great deal of physical pleasure, and physical pleasure is good, but that doesn't make adultery itself good. Literally everything that exists has some good in it, but our moral responsibility is to choose that which serves not just some lesser good like pleasure, but the highest good, the source of all good, i.e. God.
Enough hubris can make any decision seem like a righteous one. Based Aquinas enjoyer
where was that free will when God intervened and split the literal ocean to save his precious chosen people. meanwhile he wont lift a finger to prevent 50 white kids from getting run over by darrel brooks
Moses was his messenger, he just gave him a helping hand in order to keep spreading the message.
Moses could have chosen a different route. The only logical conclusion you can reach here is that Moses was a totally shit navigator. I mean 40 years in the desert? Even if you started at one end of the sahara and walked in a straight line you would reach the other end in a couple of years.
I'm sure all those kids in Africa are glad that God gave them the free will to be born with aids and die of starvation.
Cry about it
Not a very Christian thing to say.
well, i am israeli
Kids in Africa suffer because theyre dumb Black folk without empathy.
>omg the world isnt a perfect paradise how could god let this happen?
>that's it I'm getting my fedora
>humans
okay but what choice does a child with brain tumor have?
That's opening up a different line to debate.
Basically when we were cast out from Eden (paradise) we entered the realms in which we now find ourselves, which includes brain tumors.
That first choice (Eve) and the second choice (Adam) led us here.
>Be in Paradise, no problems LOL
>"Don't eat the apple"
>Eats apple
>"OK Have it your way then...
>Brain tumors in children and Terrorists driving crowds
>No brain tumors in Eden.
Freewill->Choice->Consequences
see
Then prove that knowledge deprives the actor of his will?
Otherwise you don't have a point.
see
if the universe god created functions based upon physical law, then man does not have free will, for man is subject to physical law, for god knew everything that would ever happen from the moment he created the universe.
>I am assuming free will cannot arise from natural laws
Any backs to fact that up?
cause and effect.
so now you're arguing free will is a metaphysical force, thus, god can't know it. which means god isn't all-knowing.
>cause and effect.
Wow that's a pretty air tight argument. My head is reeling lmao
Yeah, that guy is a total genius.
When did I say any of that you clown
you implied that free will doesn't follow physical law (read: dualism) therefore it isn't part of the universe god created
But this is really just down to you not really understanding what you're saying. much less what I'm saying.
>you implied that
I didn't say or imply that lmaoooo
Don't let your next post be such an embarrassing strawman lol
>But this is really just down to you not really understanding what you're saying.
No, this is you having difficulty understanding the basic theology of the true faith.
The laws of physics (and biology, genetics, etc.) only set parameters for man's ability, not his capacity for independent will (unless we're talking about disabled people, which is a different conversation.
So, back to
Can you answer?
your argument is now that god knowingly and actively gives kids brain tumors.
>Bud, you gotta drink your juice or you'll get thirsty
>NO DAD I HATE JUICE
>Gets thirsty
>How could daddy do this to me?
All fedoras simply project their daddy issues onto religion and seethe at it. Nothing more complex than that at work
>being born with a brain tumor is the same as being thirsty
i also like how all attempts to reconcile "free will" with an all-knowing creator of the universe rely upon characterizing humanity as a toddler or drug addict.
>characterizing humanity as a toddler or drug addict
Clearly not a student of history. This is a pretty solid characterization.
it also contradicts any sort of assertion that man has free will.
People choose to do things all the time. We experientially make decisions every day. The only way people can rationalize the idea that we don't have free will is pretending that all the context in which a decision is "made" forces a predetermined conclusion. This is functionally indistinguishable from making an informed decision.
Frankly the whole 'but it's not REALLY free will' argument has always just felt like people desperately seeking absolution from making their own decisions.
see
here's half a (you), best I can do
Omnipotence is the idea being discussed in the rock debate, not free will or omniscience.
free will vs omniscience == can god cause things who's outcome he can't predict? same debate, different subject.
So it's not about uncovering any kind of truth about the human condition for you, but to muddy the waters with useless hypothetical debate. Cool, good to know.
What a sad way to view yourself
the truth of the human condition is god isn't real, you aren't cursed, and are ultimately and solely responsible for only your own actions.
>[You] are ultimately and solely responsible for only your own actions
>You have urges and motivations that contradict taking actions you deem to be just and right
>You AREN'T cursed
Seems like a curse to me. Thank God for the redeeming power of Christ.
Not an argument.
Atheists quite simply don't believe in free will, they believe humans are biological robots who are completely unable to influence their behavior since the moment they were born. They have a hard time assimilating concepts like personal responsibility of freedom of action because they genuinely believe that they're barely conscious creature who are slaves to the chemical reactions in their brains.
but anon, all-knowing creator is a harder contradiction of free will than determinism, as even determinism breaks down at the quantum level.
Omniscience doesn't prevent free will.
it does when the omniscient entity created the universe and everything in it.
>God can't create being will free will because... he just CAN'T, okay?!
You're saying god can create something he can't predict. Which would mean he's not all knowing.
>He's still claiming that knowing the outcome of a decision ahead of time is AKSHUALLY metaphysical mind control
Give it a rest and just admit that your argument totally breaks down here. You've yet to construct a single syllogism demonstrating this claim to be true because you simply can't
>he's still ignoring "all knowing creator of the universe"
is it cognitive dissonance? are you just actively avoiding combining these two ideas?
>he's still ignoring "all knowing creator of the universe"
I'm ignoring nothing, I'm actively pointing out that your argument rests on the presupposition that free will cannot manifest from natural law. When pressed on this, your only response was literally 'cause and affect' which is laughable.
the "presupposition" is "can god create something he can't predict?" If yes, he's not all knowing, if no, he's not omnipotent, etc. etc.
>All he can do is repeat his assertion because he can't actually engage with challenges to his premise
That's what you get when you don't actually think through your positions and just rely on parroting a 'gotcha' image macro lmao
I accept your concession.
Omnipotence doesn't prevent free will either unless said omnipotent being is directly controlling your actions with your full awareness and turning you into a meat puppet.
So god didn't create the universe or god isn't all knowing.
See
You're 2/3 of the way to making a syllogism but you skipped a step. Wonder why.
The core premise I'm operating upon is Epicurus' proof against god, thus pointing out when you contradict either all-powerful, all-knowing, or all-loving.
So by your own admission, your only argument is entirely derived from a meme? Explains why you can't expound on
without resorting to vagaries like 'cause and affect'
>vagaries
that word doesn't mean what you think it does.
cause and effect is the simplest way to describe reality as a whole. citing it traps you into trying to say the universe doesn't operate by cause and effect.
Again, you're using it as a vague short hand to imply it's impossible for agency/free will to arise from deterministic processes. That's by no means proven so it's just an assertion.
Pretty poor reading comprehension if you read that as a concession. Find a new image macro to parrot if you can't support the premises of the one you've currently chosen
you concede when you respond to an argument without substance.
>Responds to an argument with 'cause and affect'
Damn I guess you conceded long ago if that's all it take
Unless you're trying to say cause and effect aren't real... lol
its cool how enthusiastic you are to completely unmake reality so your fake god can be a part of it
>He thinks just saying 'cause and affect' is a fleshed out argument
Ask me how I know you never went to college
Omnipotence and Omniscience mean different things.
>That's why they are different words dude.
Dr Ben Carson who was born in abject poverty, who chose of his own freewill to follow Gods advice and better himself and became a ground-breaking Brain Surgeon isn't whining about how god made him a drug-addict who has to suck wieners to get his next meth hit, that's you.
Ben actively thanks God for the opportunities that got him where he is today.
there you go, projecting again.
>NoYU!
Sad, it's like you've given up...... again.
>God's whole master plan for humanity was predicated on Adam and Eve being cast from the Garden due to disobedience, so humanity could learn and grow
>punish them and all their descendents eternally for something that he needed to happen
What a moronic convulted mess. Imagine thinking a perfect being came up with this rather than it being the mythological ramblings of some Bronze Age semites.
>God's whole master plan for humanity was predicated on Adam and Eve being cast from the Garden due to disobedience
>Just makes shit up and smears it on the keyboard as if it's an objective truth.
There you go again. You must have a massive ass, because you have pulled so much shit out of it that surely you must be running out, but no, .... it seems to be a neverending supply, almost as if you are eating and shitting at the same time.
So God wanted them to chill in Eden for eternity but Adam and a snake (God made both of them) fricked up his master plan?
>>Just makes shit up and smears it on the keyboard as if it's an objective truth.
The irony of a christcuck typing this out lmao
>So God wanted them to chill in Eden for eternity
Yup
>Adam and a snake (God made both of them) fricked up his master plan
Firstly may I say TOGTFO
Secondly, giving people freewill has consequences.
>creates thing, knowing exactly what that thing will do every instant it exists
>but that thing has free will
>C-cause and affect!
>Scratch a fedora and a seething incel will bleed
Many such cases!
I know you are a moron.
You still have choices.
>>So God wanted them to chill in Eden for eternity
So why give people free will if they're just supposed to chill in paradise forever and never need to know the difference between right and wrong?
Why do you keep choosing to act like a moron.
You can choose not to.
>can't address the argument
>lashes out
You're flailing now buddy. Maybe it's time to close the thread and move on
The neverending supply of shit continues.
but i didn't eat the apple did i?
so Choice and Consequence are disconnected - you can suffer the consequences of anyone and everyone else's actions
So Christian theology believes that who Adam was exactly is irrelevant: had it been me, or you, or anyone, we all would have done the same thing, and made the same choice, and eaten the apple. In fact you're "eating the apple" ever second, thousands of times a second, if that helps hou visualize it better. Your refusal to believe that is true is "eating the apple", which, though it happened literally, is also a cosmic allegory for wanting Gods creation and not God, which you are again doing thousands of times a second, every second.
>had it been me, or you, or anyone, we all would have done the same thing, and made the same choice, and eaten the apple
That sounds like the opposite of free will to me
No, it is the definition. You typing that sentence and choosing to still not believe in god are free will. I don't even mean this in a derogatory way, but are you legitimately stupid? By stupid I mean literally incapabale of grasping and retaining this really simple concept, which is what stupidity is?
Love cannot exist without free will. God could, at any moment, dissolve the entire universe around you, and reveal Himself to you, his magnitude and power, and you would bow doen before Him and worship Him. But then that would make you his slave, not someone who loves Him, not someone who has free will. You are currently in a state of free will. If He revealed His magnitude and power to you, you would not be.
You seem to be upset that the world fell into evil but with free will it was always going to, no matter who the "players" were. Quit acting like you wouldn't have eaten the apple, that is delusion and an excuse. You're eating the apple every second of every day, and so am I.
>you would bow doen before
I'll stand, thanks. Attempts to intimidate me simply anger me.
>Anyone would be forced to eat the apple
>anyone would be forced to choose to eat the apple
Any way you slice it, your free will is subverted. Your little testimony you wrote out here is completely irrelevant.
It's not because we all have a choice, right now. Even after Adam ate it, he had the choice to repent to God and ask for forgiveness when he asked how they knew they were naked, but ehat does he do? He blames God for.giving him Eve, since she eas the one who "made" Adam eat.
Free will as a concept can't be subverted because it is literally what made Adam fall. You seem upset we live in a world with evil but maybe insteas of b***hing about it you can accept the facts and now work towards perfecting yourself in God through virtue and Christ. Literally the only choice. That, or continue to be a slave to sin.
>Free will as a concept can't be subverted because it is literally what made Adam fall
Wrong. This cannot be reconciled with the claim that ANYONE would've certainly eaten the apple to. Also who could forget when God subverted Pharaoh's free will so he could send his goons to slaughter innocent Gentile infants.
>You seem upset
You seem obsessed with projecting anger onto anyone picking apart these insane claims
>projecting anger
I'm not angry because I understand the concepts pretty clearly, I'm only trying to help you understand them. It's obvious you fail to and don't want to and keep making excuses not to, and that's your choice, that is free will. That is eating the apple. In a bizzare way you are proving my point.
>So Christian theology believes that who Adam was exactly is irrelevant: had it been me, or you, or anyone, we all would have done the same thing, and made the same choice, and eaten the apple
This was your point. If God creates a situation, where ANYONE is forced to act in a certain way, then that's by definition a subversion of free will. But by all means, keep trying to psychoanalyze me instead of contending with your moronic apologia.
>So Christian theology believes that who Adam was exactly is irrelevant: had it been me, or you, or anyone, we all would have done the same thing, and made the same choice, and eaten the apple
yes, exactly. He is emblematic of humanity and our hate of God and love of ourselves, but through Christ we find redemption of our condition and our salvation.That's exactly right, now you're getting it.
Thats a quote, not the argument I was making, moron. By your own admission (and the Bibles) God subverts human free will for the sake of his own convulted machinations. Don't even bother replying with something that's not relevant to this point again.
>subverts
He never subverts our free will. Did he subvert adams? Did he subvert yours in typing that last reply?
>He never subverts our free will. Did he subvert adams
He did to Pharaoh. And you said yourself that ANYONE would've "chosen" to eat the apple, which means that only one option exists in that pivotal case, and free will did not exist. Unless you're at the point where you want to retreat to "the garden of Eden was just le metaphor!"
>which means that only one option exists in that pivotal case, and free will did not exist.
Nope. Just becasue one option has a better outcome or is more appealing or whatever, you still make the choice
anon, your "everyone eats the apple" thing is saying that knowledge is sin. awareness is sin. that humanity's very existence is sin. which characterizes god as
>i created sin and its sinful how can this be happening to me
Knowledge is not sin, is removal of innocence.
Adam made the choice with his own free will.
>Adam made the choice with his own free will.
But if everyone would've done the same in his position, and you emphatically claim this, how do you have a choice if only one option is a possibility? It's not free will if you're only given one option.
technically eve ate it first, but Adam had the chance to repent to God but didnt (also his own choice amd free will)
see
>how do you have a choice if only one option is a possibility?
Fake premise. Both choices are possible. Most people would just fail to pick the "right" one
>Most people would just fail to pick the "right" one
That's not the claim ITT, that's supposedly based on "Christian theology"
>Just becasue one option has a better outcome or is more appealing or whatever, you still make the choice
That's not what you said though. You said anyone would choose the same as Adam, despite being the overtly wrong choice, in which case free will is being subverted.
so god is the petulant child in the equation. he creates the circumstances and then tries to absolve himself of responsibility. Washing his hands, so to speak.
doesn't sound very omniscient
He banishes them from Eden so evil will not exist forever if they eat from thebtree of life.
He is omniscient, He will destroy evil and raise the dead to living in the new world but only those who loved and followed Him and believed in Him in this life. That is the definition of power: having complete control over your creation. We are basically living in a moral test right now to see who loves Him, unironically. That's the only purpose of the universe as it stands right now. He has promised us a grain of sand in the next, perfect world is more powerful and incredible than anything and everything in this one, and I believe Him. Once again, as an atheist you don't understand full Christian theology, so you ignore the fact all us Christians are waiting for is the world to be reborn without sin. But he will only accept those eho denied sin in this life, in favor of Him. And that can only exist with free will.
Now just pretend for a second God is totally synonymous with truth. (I know it's hard for you.) and when you replace truth with God in all those instances it actually is a sensible argument.
>christians are waiting to be reborn in a world without free will
I just explained it will be a world with the definition of free will since it is only comprised of those people who CHOSE God over evil in this one. That world, yea, Christians are waiting for, where we will be rethroned in our rightful place: Rulers of the entire universe with God. We were created to be Gods and rule the universe with him, but we wanted to be gods without Him. Through Christ and the free will of choosing to be with Him, we can return to our rightful place as gods and rulers of creation with God. That is Christian theology.
>we'll still have free will
>but everyone will be choosing the same thing that God wants
Wew. A distinction without a difference
I kow you will post that same bullshit argument over and over, but it's still your choice to do so.
Kys
Not an argument relevant to that post. Keep seething homosexual 😉
QED 😉
No, that's your biased conclusion. A conclusion you chose, because free will
I'm not biased though. There's just no reason to think god exists.
I'm not religious. I'm enjoing the intellectual aspect of the discussion. Don't giva frick about the premse, could even be a discussion about Star Trek
I just think your position is extremely biased.
so being gods and rulers of the universe with complete and utter control of the infinite possibilities, ideas, collaborations, and aspects of creation, from the cosmic to the microscopic, to do with whatever we please, but in their perfected form, in homor and love of God, isn't free will? "wee" indeed, if you believe that isn't the definition of freedom. That's literally what Heaven is.
>man is god
god lower case, not uppercase. But yes, in Christian theology we were created to be gods and rulers of the entire universe. Did you not know that?
>Heaven is where we have free will but everyone chooses to do the same thing because they just love God that much
You just keep repeating the same moronic thing lol
>everyone does the same thing
when did I ever say that? Now you're making up things I said. Heaven is infinite possibilities and creations without ceasing, all in their perfected form, in the name and love of God. Heaven is going to be an incredible and amazing adventure.
>Heaven is infinite possibilities and creations without ceasing, all in their perfected form, in the name and love of God.
You said it right here. You'll have the free will to do whatever you want as long as you're praising God n sheeit, but not because you have to, but because you want to and you couldn't even imagine the alternative.
>You'll have the free will to do whatever you want as long as you're praising God n sheeit, but not because you have to, but because you want to
yes! exactly! you're starting to get it! anon, I am legitimately proud of you. We made some progress today. Heaven is for the people who love God more than anything, amd want to be with Him forever, that's exactly right.
>and you couldn't even imagine the alternative.
I can anon, it's called hell, and all who are in hell choose it.
And that's my point. If everyone only has a single option to choose, then you're really not choosing anything, which means free will is a farce.
What you're saying is one is so obviously better than the other: Heaven is obviously better than Hell, but again, we have the choice between the two, God doesn't force us to choose. The only farce is choosing Hell (sin and evil) over Heaven (Goodness and Virtue). We ar emaking good progress anon: you don't have to believe in Christian theology (though I believe you should), but you should at least attempt to understand it.
We're back to free will not existing in Heaven then
Free will exists in Heaven, what doesn't exist in Heaven is evil. In Heaven you have the free will to do whatever you want, but only with good, whereas here you have the free will between good and evil. Does that not make sense? In Heaven everything will be perfected and we have the free will to infitely create and explore and expand amd control all naturebat our whim without limitations because there is no evil. Clear now?
If you can only choose goodness in heaven and nothing else then free will doesn't actually exist. If evil is explained by free will then you can't have a lack of evil while also having agency.
Heaven is simply choosing an infinite variety of Good things all the time, in varying degrees, with other gods of creation, all in honor and love of God. Heaven is for people who love God and choose their free will to honor and revere him forever, everything I make and create in Heaven will be in honor of God and humanity, I will offer it to God in my love for him and he will offer back to me 1000 fold, and then I will create more with other gods and offer it back and he will give me more. It will be the definition of a loving and perfect relationship, all free will, since I choose to love Him and Choose what to create to make with other gods for Him and for my love of creation and God.
That's heaven in Christian theology. I can eat a sandwich, go on a walk, kiss my girlfriend, all good things. I can choose a variety of good things on earth too, but here I have the choice of evil as well. In Heaven it will be only good choices.
It sounds like the freest thing in the universe.
You're conflating this life, where evil exists, with the next one, where it doesn't, but free will exists in both.
see
if evil is the result of free will, then free will doesn't exist in heaven.
If you are in Heaven you have shed your evils and are free to be the most glorious you that you are.
You're just finding different ways to repeat that free will doesn't exist in heaven.
You are just finding ways to be deliberately ignorant.
You do you bro.
I'm reading your statements and repeating back to you the objective content of them, and you're calling that ignorance.
You're operating on the supposition that your god is real and is all powerful and will reward you, thus causing you to interpret things in that light.
>I'm reading your statements and repeating back to you the objective content of them, and you're calling that ignorance.
No, you are reading my statements and completely misunderstanding them.
>You're operating on the supposition that your god is real and is all powerful and will reward you, thus causing you to interpret things in that light.
Here is the perfect example of what I said above. You not only have no understanding of what I am saying, you are now trying to assert that your misunderstanding is what I am saying and what I believe.
But I am glad you are getting some attention which you seek.
>be christian
>get told you believe in god
>no you're misunderstanding
lmao
Am I christian?
Was I told I had to believe in God?
>lmao
Hello Pagliacci.
>Heaven is obviously better than Hell
if that were true, your religion wouldn't have needed to characterize hell as eternal torment.
>heaven is existence with God
>hell is existence without God, because to sin is to be separate from God
>elect to be separate from God
>somehow it is a shock that you go to hell, not heaven
Anon if you want to refuse God, why would you also want to go to Heaven? Why would a good creator inflict that sort of eternal punishment on you?
>humanity will always choose sin
>free will tho
If there are two choices on a test, and its not possible to choose one, then the test is faulty.
You can certainly choose not to sin.
There’s a whole book written on the expectations and actions you need to adhere to or avoid.
It’s simply that you lack the temperance to do so, or are so inflated with pride that you are incapable of asking for forgiveness when you err.
not according to
‘Christian Theology’ isn’t a source.
>Anon if you want to refuse God, why would you also want to go to Heaven?
To not be punished by a sadist for eternity but not wanting to kiss his ass either
>I just like, want to be my own god WITHOUT God, like, know what I'm saying?
literally Lucifers mindset
Given that God is Good, to exist without God is to exist without Good. He’s not punishing you, you’re getting exactly what you’re asking for by living in sin: an existence without Good.
Its kinda sad to think you've never met a good person who doesn't believe in god.
See also:
You’re making an argument already elaborated on by the church fathers a millennia and some change ago. Yes, you can be good without believing in God—but you’re also going to err, and because of your hubris, you won’t ask for forgiveness from an entity you don’t believe exists. So since you don’t believe God exists, why would you want to exist with Him for eternity?
Ergo, Hell.
Why would I ask forgiveness from the entity that created the gauntlet that was my life? Shouldn't he be apologizing to me?
Elaborate anon.
What’s made your life a gauntlet of suffering?
>What’s made your life a gauntlet of suffering?
According to you, God did. Or are we back to "god didn't create the universe."
No, moron-kun, I’m asking about the specific events that have occurred in your life that make the prospect of God so appalling.
All those specific events are a result of God creating the universe. Therefore God is ultimately responsible. and he knew beforehand everything that would happen.
For some reason though, you're trying to get lost in the minutiae and ignore god's responsibility in creating the universe.
Uh-huh.
So if you were to, say, rape your mother, is that God's fault or yours?
There's only one right answer here anon, be careful! I'm denying you free will with a rhetorical question!
It's his mothers fault for being so sexy.
I guess there WAS a third option after all, damn.
God always finds a way to blame him.
It's gods fault for making his mother so sexy though. He had no choice but to rape his sexy sexy mother.
>only people who subsume their free will will be part of the new world
doesn't sound like free will. sounds like obey or cease to exist.
it is free will, and it unironically is "obey or cease to exist". You have the choice to obey or not.
>knew the moment he created the universe not only who would obey or not, but why
what???
>"eating the apple" is both a literal act that "Adam" (who you also are) did and a cosmic allegory for belief in god
this sounds like an idea fabricated by desperate christians to try and make sense out of the disconnect between Choice and Consequence (god punishing all humans for all eternity for one act by one person)
You don't even know who your great great Grandfather was. You still live in the consequences of his choices.
exactly, and neither do you, but we both have to accept them. It's the same with Adam.
That was my point. Agreed.
Your father made the choices he did, you live in the consequences.
A billionaire made the choices he did, his son lives in those consequences.
Do you understand that really simple analogy?
so you both agree with me that we suffer the consequences of other people's choices?
so the initial post i responded to
is wrong
>Freewill->Choice->Consequences
is wrong
Another dumb take.
It's a metaphor. Equate 'father' with 'god' and the choices you make have consequences.
>Equate 'father' with 'god' and the choices you make have consequences.
you're so fricking dumb you can't even follow your own metaphor
in the initial metaphor, i am suffering consequences for my father's choices
replacing "father" with "god", i would be suffering consequences for god's choices??? god is the one forcing us to suffer consequences of other people's decisions
You are living in the consequences of Eve and Adams choice.
You truly are moronic.
which is my point
we are suffering the consequences of other people's choices
which means that this post
is wrong
>Basically when we were cast out from Eden (paradise) we entered the realms in which we now find ourselves, which includes brain tumors.
It's called 'Reading Comprehension', you should try it sometime.
>make sentient apes for reasons
>waits for 99.999999% of the universe's lifespan to actually get around to actually making them
>wait a further million-ish years to actually start talking to them about this whole thing called existence
>talk to only a select grouping of these apes on a relatively small portion of their entire home planet
>bestow upon them specific edicts for conducting one's existence at any given moment
>promise the sentient apes that were basically an afterthought to your whole universe experiment a literal eternity of pain and misery based entirely on them merely hearing your own edicts, much less following them outright
>also only eat animals that chew thier own vomit and the gays are ewwwwwww
Literally, honestly and purely unironically what the actual frick did God mean by this?
>Be only a 13 billion years into 'the plan'
>Thinks that it already knows everything so obviously 'plan' has failed
>Doesn't make it to the year 1 Trillion because 'waaaaah God is bad'
> 1 trillion year old amoeba descendents partying like it's 1999
>trust in God's plan guys!
>only another 18 billions years until we learn The Truth!!!!
>in the meantime give me money
Never breed, anon
>Never breed, anon
Yes, keep saying that to yourself in the mirror.
>get to control my own money, sleep schedule and sanitation status
Sure thing, friend!
You'll figure it out eventually when you get older...
But by then it will be too late, and in your despair you will remember this exact post.
>muh free will bullshit again
Why are you people so utterly moronic?
>Chad gets born a 6'3" handsome genius with a big dick at a good home in 1980s America
>spends his life in ease, never gets sick, helps the people around him, marries, has children, dies and goes to Heaven never having faced any actual hardships
>Igor is born as a 5'6" balding weakling with a crooked foot in 1800s Russia, and he has to steal and kill in order to keep his little sister safe after their mother died in childbirth and their father died from drinking
>after a life of suffering he goes to Hell to be tortured forever
>little Susie gets bone cancer at 12 and after an excruciating period she dies
Damn, God's infinite love looks like THAT?!
>inb4 "brooooo you just don't get it, this utter game of chance that is life that smiles upon some and curses others is totally fair and even if it's not it's because good and evil have to exist because Eve and whatever and basically the base fact that pain can lead to growth basically means that my omnipotent entity is all-good and all-loving even though it's letting 6 YOs die from bone cancer while thieving scumbags are living well and good till their 90s"
Our God is an AWESOME GOD!
Keep reading the thread, I have already addressed that.
Free will doesn’t exist. You can’t defend an assertion (your god exists), with another assertion you’re not willing to prove. If free will exists then explain heaven. How is a place like heaven possible? Describe what heaven is to me, anon.
>Makes heaven
>'Don't rape children'
>Rapes children
>'No heaven 4U'
>Describe what heaven is to me, anon
Keep going the way you're going and you will never (eternally) know.
You didn’t describe heaven, you dodged the question. Not surprising.
What about morons or the mentally insane? What was god's beef there?
For the lulz.
>be rich
>be young
>be white
>be male
>"REEE WHY IS LE GOD SOOOO BAD" REEEEEE"
What causes this phenomenon
Material comfort disconnects you from reality. Same reason politics among the affluent get super spacey and dissociated from any real problems
Literally because they are virgins. I remember how much different I became and free after one pussy frick.
really is pussy that powerful
Only if you penetrate it for the purposes of procreation and family.
Otherwise it's just a cum-dump hole that you also have to talk to and pretend that you're interested in their mund-numbing bullshit.
Having kids is fricking gay. Tell me a reason to have them that doesn't turn into circular reasoning, you literally can't. It's irrational/simian
>existence is fricking gay. prove you exist in a way that doesn't turn into circular reasoning
Yes too
It's the biological imperitive for life to produce the next generations and so forth.
Humans have evolved to what we are now.
If we don't have kids eventually humans disappear.
Not that complicated.
have a nice day
God can do anything.
He can make a boulder so heavy even he cant lift it. And then he lifts it anyway.
So Chuck Norris is God is what you're saying....
I don't get it.
People who have power are pedos and corrupt. Just look out your window to see this.
If God is all-powerful, then he cannot be good.
Aka: God is standing idly by as bad things happen so therefore he's a dick.
If he's all-good, then he cannot be all-powerful.
Aka: He's doing his best but he's not powerful enough to help everyone thus bad things happen.
It's the idiocy of someone who doesn't understand man's place before God.
>Could have used his money to cure cancer or something
>Could have spent his time reading through thousands of years of philosophers, theologians, mystics, and other religious leaders who asked these same questions
>Instead decides to pick a fight with superman over a glorified facebook post
Snyder is an absolute hack
>If mom is willing but not able to release me from timeout, then she must not be my real mom.
>If mom is able but not willing to release me from timeout, then she is a b***h.
>If mom is able and willing to release me from timeout, then why am I in timeout?
I know hes talking about Supes here, who is mortal and fallible, but it does bother me how often super genius characters are shown espousing absolutely bottom of the barrel philosophies because the halfwits that write the script have room temp iqs
reminder: free will vs omniscience is just a another form of "can god make rock too heavy to lift." Except with the added bonus that the bible directly states these contradictory concepts coexist, that god can cause outcomes he can't predict, but he can also predict them.
If you could see all events at all points in time and also existed outside of time it's possible for someone limited by time to make a choice without it having to be predestined (which it would have to be if you had the same knowledge but existed within time and causality).
This was the only part of BvS (UE) that I found regrettable. It's too easy of a thing to have Luthor say, especially since the rest of the film (and MvS) is already so overt with the evocations of biblical imagery.
And if Zack Snyder really had so much faith in The Republic, then it is a shame that he didn't have the chance to move on to Fear & Trembling.
Being able to do something doesn't make you bound to do it. This logic is moronic.
>*pretends no Catholic has ever answered the question of evil before... in your path*
No Amazing Atheist tier 2008 style fedora is ever going to read anything written by theologists. They'd have to actually critically engage with ideas rather than pretending to do so. It's easy to dunk on young earth creationists so they just stick to that
whats the answer to Epicurus then?
Same answer that has been given half a dozen times in this very thread. Willful ignorance isn't an argument
>can't answer
uh huh. the reality is there is no answer, its a paradox, and the only reason you think otherwise is because some holy man impressed you with pretty words covering broken logic.
>Willfully ignores all answers given to his question
>Pretends the question hasn't been answered
anon. free will is contradicted by omniscience or god is not omniscient. its a pretty simple and succinct refutation.
That's a presupposition tho?
what part? the part where god is omniscient or god created the universe?
The presupposition that it's contradiction. You're presupposing that knowledge of a result or action deprives the actor of his positive assent to his action.
>Give child the liquid volume development problem
>Know he will incorrectly state one volume is larger than the other
>He has no longer made a decision and is mind controlled by my powers of knowing what he would choose
This is really what fedoras believe
There you go again, ignoring the whole "all knowing creator of the universe" bit. Its like you can't articulate the concept at all.
>Can't explain how knowing the choice made by another party ahead means a choice wasn't made
>Deflects
This is really how fedoras argue
>free will is contradicted by omniscience or god is not omniscient
> Still not understanding what omniscience actuall means.
Explained and ignored.
see
In order to reconcile free will and "all knowing creator of the universe," you need to characterize god as an inactive third party, which would mean he didn't create the universe.
Knowing =/= Forcing.
You are either trolling (that's ok, this is Cinemaphile after all), or you are irredeemably moronic, that's ok too, everyone needs someone to laugh at.
see
> A man builds a house and sells it
> Family moves in and does their own thing.
>Obviously the man didn't build the house because he isn't controlling the family
We are reaching levels of moronation that shouldn't be possible.
You do realize how far you've moved god away from "all knowing all powerful creator of the universe," with that comparison, right?
>all knowing
Doesn't force your choices
>All powerful
Has the ability to force your choices, but you are free because he chooses it to be that way
>Creator of the universe
This literally has nothing to do with the two points above, and appears to be the bit your brain cannot handle.
see
its always the same outcome with this debate. you perform mental gymnastics until you're mentally exhausted and call it a win.
Attempting to evaluate an omnipotent perspective while existing as a nonomnipotent entity is the very exercise of foisting the creation of a rock onto God that He can't lift. Your premise is mental gymnastics.
No, you. Your attempt to reconcile omniscience with free will amounts to saying god isn't omniscient, but he can be. The rock thought experiment is a simplification of this. The point is to help you realize omnipotence/omniscience are self-contradictory concepts.
>The rock thought experiment is a simplification of this.
That's just a disingenuous word play without any meaning.
He cannot create that rock specifically because he's all powerful, meaning that your preamise was nonsensical to begin with
>he's all powerful therefore there are things he can't do
mental gymnastics
Not only omniscience and omnipotence aren't contradictory but one clearly implies the other, this is metaphysics 101.
>Attempting to evaluate an omnipotent perspective while existing as a nonomnipotent entity
All theists do this literally all the time.
>noooo you can't know the nature of God it's impossible!!!
>but here, let me tell you exactly what his desires and motivations are
>plops another turd on the keyboard and smiles at the achievement
I know, the guy is like the dumbest person in the room who thinks he is the smartest person in the room.
But one tries....
>This literally has nothing to do with the two points above
There's a presupposition buried like 4 layers deep there that free will can't exist in a universe with natural laws. Don't bother pressing him on this claim, as his response is literally just 'cause and affect' with no further elaboration.
You're effectively just arguing with the image macro, not a person
>Atheist doesn't understand free will which is a fundamental concept to every single religion
many such cases
His power lies in the creation of the universe, which is all-good. Humans create evil, not God. A relationship sithout freedom cannot exist, and we choose to live a life without Him and as he has not commanded, whoch spawns evil. Evil and sin are simply good things gone about in the wrong way, or a perverted good, and all good comes from God.
God's power also lies in that He will give you your final judgement.
>evil isn't my fault because I only created the things that created it, with full knowledge they would do so
that's like saying "i didn't kill her, the bullet did."
God actually does aknowledge that in a sense he is responsible for evil in the old testament. Evil only exists as an opposition a parasite to Good, and since God is Good, he is, in a sense, a neccesary factor for it's existance. But he did not "create" it, humans choose it over his goodness. God created only goodness, so you analogy does not make sense. We hold the Gun, not God, God is just the one who created the gun. We can use the gun for good and evil, and the choice is ours.
You're also, as many atheists do, forgetting revelation and what will eventually be the recreation of the perfect world where there is no sin, and evil will be destroyed forever, which is all any practicing Christian is looking forward to.
So you're saying evil either isn't part of the universe or god didn't create the universe.
That's not what I said at all. I said free will is part of the universe, since a relationship cannot exist without it, and the gives us the option of evil
do you really fail to understand this? If I chain you around the neck and tie you in my basement, and say we're in a loving relationship, no one would agree with me. They'd say you're my slave. God could do that at any moment but He doesn't He eants us to choose to love Him and be with Him forever of our own free will by choosing Good.
I can't believe you don't understand this..Maybe you're just stupid..
All you're doing is talking around the core contradiction between free will and omniscience. Because that's all you can do.
>be God
>creator of the entire universe and time itself
>only reveal yourself to a few thousand people in the middle east 2000 years ago, conveniently before everyone had smartphones
>refuse to elaborate
>leave and never reveal yourself again
why?
>If God real, then how come he never comes to me personally to tell me he real? Checkmate Christcucks
Tiresome, elementary tier fedora tipping.
>If God real, then how come he never comes to me personally to tell me he real?
I never claimed that.
What I asked was
>How come all those people in the middle east 2000 years ago got definitive proof of God, but everyone outside of that location and time period has to rely on blind faith?
Is that not a valid question?
>G-God should've waited for Tik Tok!
For the lulz obviously.
"good" is a human construct.
Easily resolved by saying that there are many gods.
if you have bad thoughts but never actually do anything bad will you go to hell?
Say you've been doing good deeds and helping people all your life but inside you're a fricked up twisted bastard would you still go to hell?
I just wanted to know for a friend
The whole point of Christianity is that everyone is a sinner. Whether you're a murderer or a humanitarian, they both need to believe in Christ to be saved
God would know you're evil and cast you into hell.
You can just be evil Anon, there is no saving you anyway.
Giving positive assent to evil thoughts and entertaining them legitimately is a mortal sin
e.g. planning and intending to commit 1st degree murder
a life of natural good is insufficient for a supernatural reward
you have to be supernaturally good (receive the sacraments)
You should just convert to Buddhism.
The whole point is forgiveness and redemption, and your friend is actively working on it. Besides, good works outweigh bad thoughts, but you could also work on these negative thoughts by analyzing how and why they arise.
>but you could also work on these negative thoughts by analyzing how and why they arise
Mostly because he enjoys them.
You get the consequences of your actions in this life according to the laws of man.
If you accept God in your life, you are forgiven, but you still get the consequences in this life.
>free will blah blah blah
But if you don't use your free will correctly, you go to hell, so you don't really have free will, do you?
If I am a loving parent, I understand that you have to restrict your child's freedom for the sake of their own safety. You don't just let your child play in traffic or stick a fork in an outlet because you "respect their freedom".
In the same way, if God truly loves us, he would restrict our freedom to ensure that not a single soul ends up in hell.
>If you choose to drink poison and die, you don't really have free will, do you?
Freedom of choice, not freedom from consequences, you dolt.
Free will is freedm of choice not freedom of consequences
>be God
>create humans knowing they will sin
>sure enough, they sin
>"wtf!!! how could this happen???
I don't see the disconnect. They chose to sin
why do christians just respond with "fedora" or "redditor" instead of actually refuting atheist arguments?
Because atheist arguments are just circular reasoning meant to cripple the discussion, not genuine attempt at reaching some intellectual conclusion
The intellectual conclusion is that god isn't real. But you don't understand, you did have breakfast.
because they have no actual refutation.
Because the kind of person that simply chooses not to believe something is very different than the kind of person that feels the need to debate that thing with strangers to assuage resentment towards their father. The "fedora" archetype exists for a reason.
>of all the places and time periods in the history of the world to be born in, I happened to be born in a place where the right religion is practiced! phew, lucky me!
>Only makes this argument because he was born in a specific time and place where fedora tipping is popular
it's called free will stupid
>if you don't hand over your wallet, I'm going to shoot you. But you have the free will to do whatever you want!
>if God is all-powerful, he cannot be all-good
Why not
Why are there so many religious nutjobs on Cinemaphile
its the closest they can get to the lion's den.
they also need constant conflict to maintain their beliefs.
Contrarianism
So what do you think about child baptisms? Or transubstantiation?
In the beginning was logos and logos was with God and logos was God.
>if God is all-powerful, he cannot be all-good
why not?
All you infidels will burn in hellfire, praise Allah.
I reject your Hebrew babble and propose to you once again:
If you rape your mother, is that God's fault or your own?
You keep needing to drop down to actions between people whenever god's responsibility is called into question.
A relevant question is if I created a machine that existed solely to rape my mother, and the machine does, in fact, rape my mother, am i to blame? The answer is yes, because I'm God in that situation.
So God created you solely to rape your mother?
If i had done so, yes.
Hello, God here, I want to know why you haven't raped your mother yet?
It's literally the only reason I created you.
Hurry up and do it homosexual.
Because you don't exist and I wasn't created for any specific purpose.
Hello, Satan here, I look forward to seeing you in person, very soon.
[PROTIP] You should have raped your mom.
You don't exist either.
I'm actually your Mom and I want you to rape me, sexy boi.
My mom doesn't post on Cinemaphile. Else she would be pissed at me for all the times I've been banned.
Honey, I am your Mom and I am a Janitor on Cinemaphile, I was the one that banned you all those times because I wanted you to come up and rape me.
b***h get off the roof. the house is three stories you're going to break something.
No, it is the relevant question.
You are attempting to discard your personal responsibility in your actions in favor of placing blame upon some divine 'other' you don't even believe in.
Allow me to entertain your scenario, however.
Did you build the machine? Did you activate it?
If yes to both, then yes, you are certainly at fault.
If you built the machine, and then somebody else activated it, why would you be at fault? You didn't rape your mother.
And since you're trying to tie this dumbfrick allegory back to God, the more accurate question would be, if you created the particles that eventually came to form that machine, are you at fault because some lunatic made a rape machine when he could have made anything else at all?
That's free will, moron.
My mental gymnastics could earn gold at the olympics. Praise be to God, death to all israelites.
If the universe was created by an all-knowing entity, then that entity knew everything that would happen in that universe and knowingly created said universe anyway, thus, that entity is responsible for everything that happens in said universe. There is no such thing as "personal responsibility" in said universe because each person would be incapable of going against the design of said universe.
you are begging to be forgiven by the entity that is ultimately responsible for everything you have ever and will ever do.
Am I arguing with a fricking Calvanist?
God knows all things that might be. He knows He wants things to be. He COULD make things precisely how He wants them to be, because He is omnipotent. Except that would deny us free will.
He COULD stop you from choosing to rape your mother, but He's not going to because if that's what you really want to do, it's on you. You are not predestined to anything.
Also, I finally found the quote that describes this argument, pic related.
It's a comment made by a Black person on some social media site, demonstrating their stunted mental capacity.
>i don't understand, I do have free will
>COULD
why didn't he?
Because that would deny you free will.
You can choose to rape your mother, or you can choose not to. God would really like it if you didn't rape your mother.
But he already denied my free will by creating a universe where he knew everything that would ever happen.
Everything that could ever happen.
You're getting boring, israelite.
god can't create something he can't predict with 100% accuracy. going against god's predictions would mean god is fallible. QED if god exists, is all knowing/powerful, free will doesn't.
If I am able to visualize every single one of your actions and consequences at once, does that mean that I am depriving of the freedom to pick and choose any one of them?
if you created the universe, yes.
>rejects hebrew babble
>worships hebrew god
lmao??
Not him, but since you invoke some kind of moral relativism as the basis for your argument, could you tell me of a case where incestuous rape was somehow justified?
>a case where incestuous rape was somehow justified
mom too sexy, we've been over this
Even if your mom was too sexy the ultimate choice of rape lies solely on you.
So in the same way you don't understand how an all-knowing creator would know everything that would ever happen, you also can't understand how someone could be so sexy that no choice can be made.
The same way God chose not to impede our free will by not directly controlling our every actions you could also choose to resist the supposedly all-consuming and unavoidable compulsion you have to rape your own mother.
>i don't understand, I did have breakfast.
Is this some copy pasted youtube comment from the amazingatheist channel? It's been made clear itt that atheists have a piss poor understanding of basic logic and philosophical concepts but I didn't realize they were resorting to reddit gotchas.
>t. can't comprehend omniscience
Are you the same poster who said that omniscience and omnipotence are contradictory? Because they aren't.
Yes, and you misunderstood. They are self-contradictory. Can't make a rock too heavy to lift, can't cause something he can't predict, etc.