Subj : Re: Angels and demons
To : jimmylogan
From : Boraxman
Date : Thu Jun 05 2025 07:33 pm
-=> jimmylogan wrote to Boraxman <=-
ji> @MSGID: <
[email protected]>
ji> @REPLY: <
[email protected]>
-=> Boraxman wrote to jimmylogan <=-
ji> My point is the foreknowledge is knowing what I will choose, but
ji> not the CAUSE of my choice. It's hard to put into words or even
ji> thoughts something that is beyond human comprehension.
One can see the outcome, but not the will behind it.
ji> That's the key for me. God's foreknowledge doesn't erase our
ji> free will - it just means He already sees the outcome. There's
ji> still a genuine decision being made, from our point of view
ji> inside time.
ji> So when you ask: "If there's only one path, who set it?" I'd say:
ji> no one sets it in the sense of forcing it. It's just that God,
ji> being outside of time, already sees the whole path we'll choose.
ji> You and I don't have this perspective. We live moment by moment.
ji> We don't even know what we'll decide tomorrow (or if we'll even
ji> be here). But just because God knows our future decisions
ji> doesn't mean He causes them.
Bo> I sort of agree. The decision is still from within us, it is,
Bo> technically us. This is why I think the claim we have no free will
Bo> doesn't quite hold. BUT I also view us having determistic decisions
Bo> (ie, our decisions are already determined by mechanics from the very
Bo> start) compatible with the idea that we do
Bo> make decisions.
ji> I see what you mean, and we may be saying the same thing. :-) Again,
ji> it's a hard concept to put into words.
I think we are saying the same thing, that the decision does come from
within us, so it is ours, and the outcome could, at least in theory,
be known ahead of time.
ji> Have you considered that hell is a choice? If someone says, "I don't
ji> want to have anything to do with a God that would do this" is
ji> basically getting their wish?
ji> Or to put it another way, God loves you enough to allow you to
ji> decide to follow Him or not - He doesn't force it either one
ji> way or another.
ji> We all sin, and evil has to be judged for there to be justice.
ji> Jesus took the punishment for us, but the punishment was still
ji> taken.
In your bar-fight analogy, our lack of knowledge blinds us, we cannot
know for certain the outcomes of our actions. To someone that can
see, the outcome is certain. The moral implications for those who
see, differ from those who can't.
However, the issue I think isn't whether we agree on what is
happening, but whether we consider it moral or not. To me, it is not
just for a being which DOES have foreknowledge, to judge those that
don't have foreknowledge for their mistakes.
As an agnostic, to me, this isn't anything to do with God, but does
reveal the flawed, and deeply troubling ethics of the culture which
created this idea. God in this case is never at fault. No matter how
hidden He is, no matter how much reason and rationality argues against
His existence, God presumes no responsibility whatsover for His
rejection. Its the fault of Man. This is a kind of thinking which is
still found in that culture today. It is a perverted morality. Those
who claim "meekness" are always the worst.
No human being deserves to burn for one day, let alone eternity, for
the "sin" of using the mind that God gave them to come to an
understandable conclusion. The fact that people think this is just,
is an indication on how the morally righteous can easily be pulled
into believing and doing terrible things.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
� Synchronet � MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org
