Ashoka
श्री कृष्णा शरणं मम
You're not reading the same Bible, or not understanding it, for sure!
I am talking about the sermon "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" by Johnathan Edwards.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
You're not reading the same Bible, or not understanding it, for sure!
So god is bound by forces beyond him?God has to be complete in the Universe and that's impossible without creating evil aspects to it as well as good...
If one suggests that logic is not part of the cosmos, then everything becomes incoherent.So god is bound by forces beyond him?
There are things that he must do, or that have to happen, regardless of his own will or desire?
The universe of the Abrahamic god is incoherent, but that is not the issue here.If one suggests that logic is not part of the cosmos, then everything becomes incoherent.
To suggest that G-d could have created an incoherent universe is meaningless.
I agree with you that it isn't.It is not logically incoherent for a universe without evil to exist..
So you agree that there is no need for evil to exist. The universe would work just fine without it. It only exists because god wants it to exist.I agree with you that it isn't.
I have never made that claim.However, arguing that G-d can create a soul that thinks independently, but also cannot disobey Him makes no logical sense to me.
There are plenty of things that you can think about doing, yet are utterly unable to act upon those thoughts. Even so, you still consider yourself an independent thinker? Adding disobedience to that list of constraints would not abridge that independence.I agree with you that it isn't.
However, arguing that G-d can create a soul that thinks independently, but also cannot disobey Him makes no logical sense to me.
Some definitions of God have requirements.So god is bound by forces beyond him?
There are things that he must do, or that have to happen, regardless of his own will or desire?
Don't start that nonsense again .. it's that trick of confusing the issue due to human perception of time.However, as the outcome of all events is determined by Allah's decree, it seems that people cannot "think independently". It certainly makes no logical sense for god (or the law) to punish people for things that were beyond their control.
It is quite obvious to me that you can't make an independent decision if you are constrained by another's.Adding disobedience to that list of constraints would not abridge that independence.
So god is constrained by our definition of him?Some definitions of God have requirements.
No doubt, I will.Say what you like.
You are falsely equating independent thoughts with independent actions. If I put a star trek device on your brain and force you to obey my list of rules, you would still be able to think independently. Just not act independently. Your reasoning is clumsy.Either one's free to obey the captain of the ship, or they are not.
You have repeatedly failed to show how free will is possible if god determines the outcome of all events. All you do is assert it is, and vaguely claim it has something to do with time.Don't start that nonsense again .. it's that trick of confusing the issue due to human perception of time.
Allah's decree is an expression that implies "G-d made it happen".
..just like the implication of "predestined".
It's a false impression, quite obviously.
Bingo!One can't be deciding independently, if G-d is deciding for them.
If there is a creator of this universe that does not fit your definition ( including but not limited to omniscient and omnipotence ) then you're not talking about God.So god is constrained by our definition of him?
If God is omnipotent, omniscient and the ultimate power and authority than I think it means God needs to be complete (perfect in Greek). I would think omnipresence would dictate that.So god is constrained by our definition of him?
That actually makes sense in the context of god being a product of our imagination. But unfortunately not if god is the omnipotent, omniscient creator of universes, the ultimate power and authority.
That's one person's interpretation. Yes, Edwards was a Calvanist/Reformed, which I don't subscribe to, as do many also.I am talking about the sermon "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" by Johnathan Edwards.
That's one person's interpretation. Yes, Edwards was a Calvanist/Reformed, which I don't subscribe to, as do many also.
In short, Edwards was neither inspired not authoritative, and may well have been just wrong - which I believe that he was.
You should've appreciated the fact that you were reading one man's interpretation, and justification of it.
No, G-d does not determine the outcome of all events.So which is it? Does Allah determine the outcome of all events by decree, or do we determine them through free will?
It can't be both.
No, I mean that to blame God for Edwards opinion, you should've know better that his views were not necessarily under the auspices of God.I was almost willing to give you a point in your favor because of your rejection of Calvinism, but then you had to go and turn it around and say that I should’ve appreciated it? I should’ve appreciated the trauma it caused me? I should’ve appreciated the depression, PTSD, the anxiety? No. No I should not have.
Except it's not just his view, and the Bible does indeed mention god being angry at everyone and sees us as deserving of Hell, and there is rejoicing when people are cast into Hell.That's one person's interpretation. Yes, Edwards was a Calvanist/Reformed, which I don't subscribe to, as do many also.
In short, Edwards was neither inspired not authoritative, and may well have been just wrong - which I believe that he was.
You should've appreciated the fact that you were reading one man's interpretation, and justification of it.