Trump's Christian supporters are unchristian

[MaxVel]

Max, if you had any idea what the argument was actually about, then you would not be under the idiotic impression that our position on this particular matter is that of no free will, the point being made is that if there is an omniscient creator, then there is no free will.

The assertion being made and the counter-arguments remaining unaddressed, rather

Since however, there is an omniscient creator, and we do have free will, your assertion fails.

You already accepted upthread that knowledge is not causation, and thus you're merely flailing away on the mouldering corpse of a horse.
There are better arguments against God's existence, but you seem to want every atheist argument to work. They don't. You'd be way more convincing if you accepted that and moved on, instead of just re-asserting your claim. But

[Sparko]

No, I mean I would know because it is historic, it happened in the past, and there is no contradiction in ones having knowledge of past free will actions.

Why is it that you can't grasp the simple fact that if you could step outside of time and so view it all, past present and most importantly the future, then all of time exists. There is no change in such a system, if all of time exists, then all of time exists, and if it is all there to be seen from the ouside, then there were, and are, no choices being made in time.

Looking at the past, describe how it would be any different under the B theory of time than whatever is in your head.

Both would have a past that could not be changed. Both would have a record of choices freely made but fixed in time.

Even in your weird view of time, the past is a "block universe" that can't be changed. Prove me wrong.

[mossrose]

Even in your weird view of time, the past is a "block universe" that can't be changed. Prove me wrong

Read any "revised" history lately?

[JimL]

The assertion being made and the counter-arguments remaining unaddressed, rather

Counter arguments have been addressed, but if you wish to make one (doubt it), feel free!

Since however, there is an omniscient creator, and we do have free will, your assertion fails.

Then logically explain the obvious contradiction in that simple minded assertion.
[QUOTE]You already accepted upthread that knowledge is not causation.
That's correct, I did. Because, once again, that is an obvious fact. But, though knowledge of the future isn't the cause of the future, it is evidence as to what the cause of the future is.

There are better arguments against God's existence, but you seem to want every atheist argument to work. They don't. You'd be way more convincing if you accepted that and moved on, instead of just re-asserting your claim. But

Once again, try to get hold of what the debate is about. It's not about gods existence, it's about the co-existence of an omniscient creator and a free willed creation.

[JimL]

Looking at the past, describe how it would be any different under the B theory of time than whatever is in your head.

Why don't you start talking about the future instead of the past? The past under the B-theory wouldn't be any different than the future, both would be fixed in time, no change, no free will.

Both would have a past that could not be changed. Both would have a record of choices freely made but fixed in time.

You're a goofus. We know that the past is closed, the past would be closed under either theory of time, but the future would only be closed under the B-theory. There would be no change in such a time theory, all percieved choices would be an illusion, they'd be set in stone for all of time. It would be like your movie film wherein every clip in the film exists and has always existed, nothing actually changes.

Even in your weird view of time, the past is a "block universe" that can't be changed. Prove me wrong.

That's just the point, it can't be changed. Yeah, you finally get it. Not!

[One Bad Pig]

You apparently don't accept correct concepts either, if they happen to contradict your beliefs.

Asserted, not shown.

[Sparko]

Why don't you start talking about the future instead of the past? The past under the B-theory wouldn't be any different than the future, both would be fixed in time, no change, no free will.

You're a goofus. We know that the past is closed, the past would be closed under either theory of time, but the future would only be closed under the B-theory. There would be no change in such a time theory, all percieved choices would be an illusion, they'd be set in stone for all of time. It would be like your movie film wherein every clip in the film exists and has always existed, nothing actually changes.

That's just the point, it can't be changed. Yeah, you finally get it. Not!

And the to you in 1970, 1980 was the future. It is only the past to us standing here now. So to the 1970 you, everything he did between 1970 and 2019 was fixed and he could not change anything. Yet you still think you had free will. If you had free will even though you could not have changed anything that happened, then you can have free will in your future choices even though you can't change anything that will happen.

[Tassman]

If you chose differently then that is what God would have known.

There was never a moment when an omniscient deity could not

[Sparko]

There was never a moment when an omniscient deity could not

He only knows because that is what you chose to do. You have not shown that he caused you to make that choice.

Every choice you make is only done once. And can never be undone. All of your past choices, all of your future ones. Just because you can't change your choice after you make it doesn't mean it wasn't done freely. So someone knowing what choice you will make doesn't mean the choice wasn't done freely.

[JimL]

And the to you in 1970, 1980 was the future. It is only the past to us standing here now. So to the 1970 you, everything he did between 1970 and 2019 was fixed and he could not change anything. Yet you still think you had free will. If you had free will even though you could not have changed anything that happened, then you can have free will in your future choices even though you can't change anything that will happen.

Wow! The so obvious logic just can't get through those logic defences you put up eh.The bolded above is just dumb Sparko. You can't equate that which has already happened with that which has yet to happen as if they are the same thing. True, you can't change past, freely chosen actions, which have already happened, and that is because THEY ALREADY HAPPENED! But if those seemingly freely chosen actions were eternally fixed as knowledge in the creator of that actor, then they weren't really freely chosen. The actor was determined to do what he did by his creator, and that fact is evinced by the forknowledge of the creator.

[Sparko]

Wow! The so obvious logic just can't get through those logic defences you put up eh.The bolded above is just dumb Sparko. You can't equate that which has already happened with that which has yet to happen as if they are the same thing. True, you can't change past, freely chosen actions, which have already happened, and that is because THEY ALREADY HAPPENED! But if those seemingly freely chosen actions were eternally fixed as knowledge in the creator of that actor, then they weren't really freely chosen. The actor was determined to do what he did by his creator, and that fact is evinced by the forknowledge of the creator.

At some point every choice you make "will have already happened" because what is future to you today will be in the past to you tomorrow. There is no difference. That is the point you keep missing.

[JimL]

At some point every choice you make "will have already happened" because what is future to you today will be in the past to you tomorrow. There is no difference. That is the point you keep missing.

The key phrase there Sparko is "at some point." There is a difference. At some point some choices have been made while others have not been made. That's the difference between the past and the future which is the point that you keep missing. That's why the past can be known and the future can not be known.

[Sparko]

The key phrase there Sparko is "at some point." There is a difference. At some point some choices have been made while others have not been made. That's the difference between the past and the future which is the point that you keep missing. That's why the past can be known and the future can not be known.

Your problem is that you keep switching models in mid-stream. When I am arguing B-theory you object with A-theory "because the future doesn't exist" - If you want to prove me wrong you have to argue within the same paradigm I am arguing. It's the same dumb arguments you use when we discuss God's nature. You object to how God acts or something, when someone explains why he acted that way, you argue "well God doesn't even exist so there!"

IF Time is the B-theory, and every action "already happened" - then all of time is no different than the way we see the past. To us the past is B-theory time, a block universe where everything that happened already happened and cant be changed. Yet we believe every choice was done freely and it is those freewill actions that are "recorded" into the past. Well, B-theory just extends that past onto the future. No difference. All actions are still free will actions and that is what is recorded, whether you are talking about 1980 or 2080.

You can't just at that point object with "the future doesn't exist yet" because you are then objecting to the B-theory of time by using the parameters of A-theory of time. It doesn't make sense.

[JimL]

Your problem is that you keep switching models in mid-stream. When I am arguing B-theory you object with A-theory "because the future doesn't exist" - If you want to prove me wrong you have to argue within the same paradigm I am arguing. It's the same dumb arguments you use when we discuss God's nature. You object to how God acts or something, when someone explains why he acted that way, you argue "well God doesn't even exist so there!"

IF Time is the B-theory, and every action "already happened" - then all of time is no different than the way we see the past. To us the past is B-theory time, a block universe where everything that happened already happened and cant be changed. Yet we believe every choice was done freely and it is those freewill actions that are "recorded" into the past. Well, B-theory just extends that past onto the future. No difference. All actions are still free will actions and that is what is recorded, whether you are talking about 1980 or 2080.

You can't just at that point object with "the future doesn't exist yet" because you are then objecting to the B-theory of time by using the parameters of A-theory of time. It doesn't make sense.

Egad! I don't have time for this continued idiocy at the moment. Be back later.

[Tassman]

He only knows because that is what you chose to do. You have not shown that he caused you to make that choice.

Every choice you make is only done once. And can never be undone. All of your past choices, all of your future ones. Just because you can't change your choice after you make it doesn't mean it wasn't done freely. So someone knowing what choice you will make doesn't mean the choice wasn't done freely.