God's Villainy

[PoopShoot]

But if I offer to leap into a pool of alligators, there are two consequences.
1: I'll leap in and possibly die
2: I won't leap in at all

Yep.

Ultimately, we can look back and say, "dgmort decided not to leap in after all." Does that alter the fact that I chose not to do it? I don't think so.

And I agree with you.

I chose to bind myself to the timeline that would, in retrospect, be the only thing that could have happened.

Nope, in retrospect, it's the only thing that did happen, not could have.

When you "choose" an option, it means that you're choosing to abide by the timeline that was outlined for you.

If it was outlined for you, it wasn't a choice.  If it's a choice, both options are valid until AFTER you've made the choice.

If an evil dictator offers me the option of following his orders or killing me, and I, being evil in this scenario, would have chosen to follow his orders even without a death threat, then I made a choice despite the fact that the option was forced.

This is not analogous to a future set in stone.  If you made that choice because it was the choice you were destined to make, then the choice is only an illusion.  The dictator in question has not guaranteed your choice, he's merely made one choice much more favorable.

Likewise, when an ultimate fate forces our options, it doesn't mean that we didn't willingly choose those options to begin with. Does that make sense?

No it doesn't.  If you have 20 options available it SEEMS that you have a choice, but if you're guaranteed to make a particular choice, you never had one.

[notself]

New International Version (©1984)
The LORD was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had iron chariots.

New Living Translation (©2007)
The LORD was with the people of Judah, and they took possession of the hill country. But they failed to drive out the people living in the plains, who had iron chariots.

English Standard Version (©2001)
And the LORD was with Judah, and he took possession of the hill country, but he could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain because they had chariots of iron.
 
King James Bible
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out [the inhabitants of] the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

American King James Version
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

I think it should be fairly easy to correctly translate a pronoun.  Evidently I am mistaken

[PoopShoot]

I think it should be fairly easy to correctly translate a pronoun.  Evidently I am mistaken

Yes, but that phrase is taken from a single word and I don't speak Hebrew.  It might not be that simple.  Regardless, they ALL imply that the victory was due to god's power, meaning the defeat was a failure of god's power.  Besides, who wants to leave "he" in it when that directly implicates god as  failure.  Gotta at least TRY to make the damned book make sense.

[dgmort19]

If it was outlined for you, it wasn't a choice. If it's a choice, both options are valid until AFTER you've made the choice.

I should say that it's not outlined for you, but by you. You are making the decisions that compose your ultimate fate. You're stuck doing those things, but only because you chose them (and will choose them). I make choices every day (such as continuing this fruitless debate ), and those choices are made with my own reasoning faculties. If I'm not making my choices, then who is?

This is not analogous to a future set in stone. If you made that choice because it was the choice you were destined to make, then the choice is only an illusion. The dictator in question has not guaranteed your choice, he's merely made one choice much more favorable.

If we assume that I am completely unwilling to give up my life, then being killed is not a choice I can make. I am restricted utterly. Thus, I must do what the dictator says, and the outcome is set in stone. But at the same time, I want to do it.

So if by "choice" you mean an option to do one of two things, then no, there is no choice. But if you mean we can make a decision to do that which appeals to us, though the alternatives are restricted by an ultimate fate, then there is a choice.

[PoopShoot]

If I'm not making my choices, then who is?

Whatever law of physics that make the future immutable.

If we assume that I am completely unwilling to give up my life, then being killed is not a choice I can make. I am restricted utterly. Thus, I must do what the dictator says, and the outcome is set in stone. But at the same time, I want to do it.

But it's not set in stone, it's YOUR choice you WANT to do whatever it takes to survive and live longer.  This doesn't mean that the future is immutable, this doesn't mean that the other option isn't available.  Conversely, in a universe wherein the future is immutable, the other option IS unavailable, its existence is an illusion, as I cannot make that choice.

[Thumpalumpacus]

No.  An omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god would have both the knowledge, power, and motivation to prevent a world filled with evils such as ours is.  The Christian conception of god collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

[dgmort19]

I can't agree that a law of physics somehow deprives me of my choices. I'm afraid that we cannot agree on this single point. However, I'm sure that we can both agree when Thumpalumpacus says

An omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god would have both the knowledge, power, and motivation to prevent a world filled with evils such as ours is. The Christian conception of god collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

I mean, what more needs to be said?

[tymygy]

No.  An omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god would have both the knowledge, power, and motivation to prevent a world filled with evils such as ours is.  The Christian conception of god collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

I cannot stand that Christians don't understand this.

argh, it irritates me.  

[Sophus]

No.  An omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god would have both the knowledge, power, and motivation to prevent a world filled with evils such as ours is.  The Christian conception of god collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

I cannot stand that Christians don't understand this.

argh, it irritates me.  

The answer I always get is, "he could have made us robots but he loved us more than that, so he gave us freewill. Freewill is why there is evil."

Just ask them if you have freewill in heaven, and if so, will there be evil in heaven. Their face usually goes blank for a good moment. If no to the latter and yes to the former, ask why then, not simply start from the get go with everyone under those circumstances (Why did god put that Tree of Knowledge in Eden?).

[tymygy]

No.  An omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god would have both the knowledge, power, and motivation to prevent a world filled with evils such as ours is.  The Christian conception of god collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

I cannot stand that Christians don't understand this.

argh, it irritates me.  

The answer I always get is, "he could have made us robots but he loved us more than that, so he gave us freewill. Freewill is why there is evil."

Just ask them if you have freewill in heaven, and if so, will there be evil in heaven. Their face usually goes blank for a good moment. If no to the latter and yes to the former, ask why then, not simply start from the get go with everyone under those circumstances (Why did god put that Tree of Knowledge in Eden?).

Thats what I do say. He set us up to fucking fail.

But they continue blindly with "faith" on their side.

[i_am_i]

This is quite funny. Here we are on an atheist forum and people are actually talking about what a right bastard God is.

[PoopShoot]

I can't agree that a law of physics somehow deprives me of my choices.

Yet that's exactly what you're stating when you claim that the future is immutable.

[PoopShoot]

Stupid capslock, I'm not retyping that, please ignore the yelling.

Just ask them if you have freewill in heaven, and if so, will there be evil in heaven.

I'VE MADE THIS POINT BEFORE.  tHEY FALL BACK ON SOME NONSENSE ABOUT HOW THE TEST IS TO WEED OUT PEOPLE WHO WILL MAKE THE WRONG CHOICES AND PEOPLE WHO DO EVIL THINGS WILL BE IN HELL, BUT THE PEOPLE IN HEAVEN WHO CHOOSE THE RIGHT THING WILL BLAH BLAH.

[Tank]

This is quite funny. Here we are on an atheist forum and people are actually talking about what a right bastard God is.

lol  Your right!

[The Magic Pudding]

Stupid capslock, I'm not retyping that, please ignore the yelling.

Just ask them if you have freewill in heaven, and if so, will there be evil in heaven.

I'VE MADE THIS POINT BEFORE.  tHEY FALL BACK ON SOME NONSENSE ABOUT HOW THE TEST IS TO WEED OUT PEOPLE WHO WILL MAKE THE WRONG CHOICES AND PEOPLE WHO DO EVIL THINGS WILL BE IN HELL, BUT THE PEOPLE IN HEAVEN WHO CHOOSE THE RIGHT THING WILL BLAH BLAH.

This reminds me of an old Dave Allen joke.
It involves two friends who die, one goes to heaven and one to hell.
The guy in hell makes a phone call to his friend in heaven.
Hell guy tells his friend about his daily routine, stoke the fire for a couple of hours and then enjoy the sinner (post) life style.
Heaven guy describes a routine of toil, dragging the sun out every morning and readying it for its journey across the sky.  There is also  endless polishing and stuff I don't remember.
Hell guy is surprised to hear things are so tough in heaven and asks why.
Heaven guy says, oh well um er there's only the two of us here.

Sorry, it was funny when Dave told it.