sargonnas9
Veteran XX
Pagy said:
Damn search function isn't working, otherwise I'd quote from the thread. But what a load of bs 1. You called me names quite a few times in that thread.
2. As I have said, I almost never personally attack someone unless they do so first.
3. You are the one too stubborn to admit that you were wrong. Here, from http://forums.philosophyforums.com/showthread.php?t=6871&page=1&pp=25:
Originally Posted by Brunning
The paradox of an all knowing god.
If god as exists he (as a deity) will seemingly know everything.
If god knows everything then he will know what i am going to do in five years time. He know what exact action i will make in five minutes. If this is truly the case then surely there can be free will. How can i decide the opposite to the action god knows im going to take??
many people say "god knows the outcome of the dicision you will make" but if he knows the decision AND the outcome surely you can decide the contary?
Can there be free will if go is all knowing?
________________________________________ __________________
Gassendi: From the fact (if it is one) that God knows what you are going to do, it does not follow that God forces you to do that thing. Presumably, if you choose to do what you do, then God knows that too. But if you choose to do what you do, then you acted freely. So even if God knows that you will choose to do something, and you do that something, it does not follow that you did not act freely.
If you choose to do X, and God knew that, then if you do X, you acted freely. Of course, if you did not, in fact do X, but did Y instead, then God could not have known that you did X, for you did not do X.
Birds: An omniscient God must exist outside of time and therefore know the beginning, end, and everything in between. We perceive events linearly, God would not. Therefore, he does not necessarily interfere with the succession of events, thoughts, actions, etc. God would not be predicting and thus confining us to these predictions. It is simply knowing.
Brunning takes up the exact same argument as you do, and Gassendi and Birds gave the answer that I basically gave you. And amazingly *fake gasp* No one ever successfully argues against their points!! Read post #53 from a guy on your said, he has a different but very interesting take on the whole thing; but yet he even accedes that understanding God's timeless attribute as meaning that he exists simultaneously at all points in time was very hard for him to grasp. Thus, even he did not give a sound response to Birds' argument.
Anyways, my point is that you still have never responded to these points I made. So keep bitching at me and yelling that I'm wrong until you're blue in the face - doesn't bother me. Until you make a sound argument against mine, I stand confident in knowing that I am correct on this argument.
Oh yeah, almost forgot:
dumbass
