I just want to sin!!!

[ppp]

He describes himself as one.

True that. He has a whole "coming out" video about it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

.
It really seems you don't because with Relativity time and space are one in the same. It can pass differently depending on relative position and such, but it doesn't mean the future has already happened based on some perspectives. It's not the future we see, but the past. Like the sunlight we see happened several minutes ago but we see it as now. Starlight that happened ages ago we can only see now.
It doesn't go the other way.

What do you mean by "the other way" ?

Special relativity eliminates the concept of absolute simultaneity and a universal present: according to the relativity of simultaneity, observers in different frames of reference can have different measurements of whether a given pair of events happened at the same time or at different times, with there being no physical basis for preferring one frame's judgments over another's.

The above is just an example of showing how "now" is only a perception.
God would perceive something like a block universe, while time appears differently to the finite beings contained within it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, it doesn't matter about the exact process of how G-d knows the future. It is enough to know that G-d has not pre-ordained it, rather He knows it in some other way.

We are not forced to choose something just because it is known.
We choose what we WANT to choose.
..and that happens to be what G-d knows. He knows it as for G-d, He perceives time differently.
Relativity is just a clue as to show us that the nature of time is not as it appears to be.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What do you mean by "the other way" ?

Special relativity eliminates the concept of absolute simultaneity and a universal present: according to the relativity of simultaneity, observers in different frames of reference can have different measurements of whether a given pair of events happened at the same time or at different times, with there being no physical basis for preferring one frame's judgments over another's.

Yes, but future events have not yet happened. Relativity does not make it possible to gain knowledge of or see the future. Theoretically we could slow down time for a traveler who would go through a few years while those on Earth go through a few decades, and factually GPS satellites must have their clocks frequently updated because time travels slower in space due to less gravitational pull. But nothing in the future has happened. The quirky thing of time is we are always enmeshed in what we call the past - not the future. But that's due to the time it takes the energy waves that produce the stimuli our brains interprets to reach us. This is why it takes several minutes for solar rays to reach is, and what we see of the sun is a past image of it.

However, it doesn't matter about the exact process of how G-d knows the future. It is enough to know that G-d has not pre-ordained it, rather He knows it in some other way.

We are not forced to choose something just because it is known.
We choose what we WANT to choose.
..and that happens to be what G-d knows.

But if god knows for sure, with 100% certainty, what we're going to choose then we can't choose another option.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

This is how a theist sees it. He begins with the belief held by faith that atheists are wrong and therefore defective in their thinking. It causes him to not even consider the commonest reason for atheism - critical thinking. It's not hard to see how faith corrupts reason. People that need compelling evidence before believing see that there is none, and become atheists. That path to atheism didn't even occur to you. It doesn't comport with your faith-based assumptions.

1) Atheists must be arrogant - "Only we think critically, accurately."
2) Atheists are snobs - "Only we few think critically.:
3) Atheists are wrong - As Jordan Peterson put it, who isn't a Christian, "What are we stupid, for thousands of years? Only skeptics are smart? I don't think so."

I guess you don't see how you are confirming my assertions. Once again, you begin with the assumption that atheists are horrible people, and create exaggerated and demeaning versions of what was actually said to you. According to you, atheists are arrogant and snobbish. Also, that they call you stupid. That's not correct - you were called unskilled in critical thinking, which is closer to being untrained in the art than stupid.

It's also not surprising that you failed to try to rebut the claim, but rather, embodied it. Nor that you ignored the criticism that you omitted logically possible options, or that faith corrupts reason. I guess that you didn't consider any of that worth thinking about or discussing, or even acknowledging that you saw or understood those words - am pretty common phenomenon on these threads when dealing with many theists. It's not just that they can't reason well. It's that they can't even participate in a discussion if the word means more than writing meaningless posts that don't address what was said or help to propel the interchange onward.

All you did was object to being told that your thinking was flawed with hyperbole. Do you not see that you are being the theist described above? Let me share an allegory of what it is like trying to have a constructive discussion with somebody who won't even acknowledge what is written to him.

I have two dogs and a knotted rope chew toy. One likes to play tug-of-war and I play that with him. If I get the rope out of his mouth, I throw it, and he brings it back. It's a cooperative effort, and we both enjoy it.

The other dog either doesn't know what to do or else isn't interested. I can't tell which, because she doesn't speak. I offer her the rope and she doesn't even look at it. I throw it, and she stands there. At first, I would go get the toy and throw it again, and maybe again. But she simply wouldn't engage. Obviously, there was nothing in it for me to keep throwing the rope and have her ignore it, so I gave up hope that she ever would. Too bad, because I think we both would have enjoyed it, but it's a cooperative effort, and one can't do it alone.

That's what these discussion are like. I've also compared them to an attempt to play ping-pong with somebody who serves, but doesn't even try to hit the return. He doesn't even look at it. There is no evidence he even was aware that a ball was returned. He likes serving, so he just serves another ball, ignores the return, and repeats the same process again and again until the other guy says that that doesn't resemble the game he enjoys, and gives up on the hope of a cooperative effort ever appearing.

I hope you don't find the allegory condescending. I respect my dogs, and mean no disrespect to you by comparing my multiple attempts to get you to engage with me in vain with throwing the rope and having to retrieve it myself for lack of cooperation from the dog, but the allegory is apt. You made a comment (serve), I answered responsively with a rebuttal (return), which you ignored and went off on an unrelated tangent (served again). I returned that as well with this post, but we both know what will follow from you, don't we? Well, I do.

 

[muhammad_isa]

But if god knows for sure, with 100% certainty, what we're going to choose then we can't choose another option.

That's not strictly true.
We can choose whatever we WANT to choose.
It is not that we can't, it is that we won't choose another option..

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That's not strictly true.
We can choose whatever we WANT to choose.
It is not that we can't, it is that we won't choose another option..

Why won't we? Amd if we won't how is it a choice?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

All the “sins” I might ever commit, I could commit as a Christian. And be saved.

is that what Jesus said?
No…Matthew 7:21-23.
(I mean, he’s the Leader of Christians; he sets the standards.)

John 15:14…”you are my friends if you do what I command you.”

Yes, all of us “sin”; the difference is the attitude: was it “inadvertently”, or on purpose?
Big difference.

 

[ppp]

That's not strictly true.
We can choose whatever we WANT to choose.
It is not that we can't, it is that we won't choose another option..

Why won't we? Amd if we won't how is it a choice?

If God, using his knowledge tells you truthfully that you are going to eat a ham sandwich at 12pm EST Feb 1, 2023, can you exercise your free will and choose to not have a ham sandwich on that date at that time?

If the answer is yes, then God was wrong and he is not omniscient.
If the answer is no, then you can make no other choice and your do not have free will.

 

[ppp]

is that what Jesus said?
No…Matthew 7:21-23.
(I mean, he’s the Leader of Christians; he sets the standards.)

John 15:14…”you are my friends if you do what I command you.”

Yes, all of us “sin”; the difference is the attitude: was it “inadvertently”, or on purpose?
Big difference.

I was raised Baptist, and Baptists believe that salvation is based on God’s grace, through people’s faith, and in Jesus Christ alone. That salvation is by grace means people cannot earn it; that it is through faith means people must trust in Christ; that it is in Christ alone means he alone can make sinners right with God.

So, no. I did not have to stop being Christian in order to sin. No matter what your heretical version of salvation might be.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If God, using his knowledge tells you truthfully that you are going to eat a ham sandwich at 12pm EST Feb 1, 2023, can you exercise your free will and choose to not have a ham sandwich on that date at that time?

If the answer is yes, then God was wrong and he is not omniscient.
If the answer is no, then you can make no other choice and your do not have free will.

Truly, it boggles me that people still believe in free will today, in a time when we know of childhood experiences molding adulthood and genetic predispositions, but yet we just will not let go of this and just accept our "will" is far too constrained to be free.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I was raised Baptist, and Baptists believe that salvation is based on God’s grace, through people’s faith, and in Jesus Christ alone. That salvation is by grace means people cannot earn it; that it is through faith means people must trust in Christ; that it is in Christ alone means he alone can make sinners right with God.

So, no. I did not have to stop being Christian in order to sin. No matter what your heretical version of salvation might be.

I find it easier to not do many things considered sin when I'm not worried about sinning. Sure, I do those things, but not repressing it means I'm not obsessing over it.
And after I left it also became easier to be more tolerant and non-judgmental. Things Christians are supposed to do but often times miserable fail at.

 

[ppp]

Truly, it boggles me that people still believe in free will today, in a time when we know of childhood experiences molding adulthood and genetic predispositions, but yet we just will not let go of this and just accept our "will" is far too constrained to be free.

I know. Me too. Indoctrination has made them believe that free will is what makes intelligent agents accountable for their actions. And so they resist it.

 

[ppp]

I find it easier to not do many things considered sin when I'm worried about sinning.

I assume you meant not worried about sinning? I agree. When I consider doing something, I primarily do an inventory to determine if my actions will tread on anyone else's autonomy, and make a decision from there,

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I assume you meant not worried about sinning? I agree. When I consider doing something, I primarily do an inventory to determine if my actions will tread on anyone else's autonomy, and make a decision from there,

Yes, I edited to add that not in there.
And that's more or less basically what I do, and if there's no victim, no one's being violated or exploited, I don't care. I used to judge all that stuff, but now I know I have better and for more important things to be concerned about. Even things I don't like. I'm not obsessed with what ever pop culture the church is demonizing. I just don't follow it and mostly don't know about it.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I was raised Baptist, and Baptists believe that salvation is based on God’s grace, through people’s faith, and in Jesus Christ alone. That salvation is by grace means people cannot earn it; that it is through faith means people must trust in Christ; that it is in Christ alone means he alone can make sinners right with God.

So, no. I did not have to stop being Christian in order to sin. No matter what your heretical version of salvation might be.

Wow, I use Scriptures, you use none, yet you call my view heretical!

“Faith without works is dead”...useless. James 2:17-26

That’s why it matters what we ‘do’!

And it’s really naïve to believe otherwise. It’s popular because it is the easier way to go.

 

[ppp]

Wow, I use Scriptures, you use none, yet you call my view heretical!

Scripture is irrelevant to my point. My point is that I did not have to stop being a Baptist in order to sin. Whether or not you agree with Baptists in their interpretation of the Bible is not my problem. Go argue with a Baptist about it.

For that matter sin had nothing at all to do with why I stopped believing that a god existed. As I said in my OP, claiming that I just want to sin is a conceit of the Christians who make that particular accusation.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Why won't we? Amd if we won't how is it a choice?

..because we don't want to. If we had wanted to choose an alternative option, then we would have done.

Now, if you don't believe that anybody has free-will whether the future can be known or not, then that is another thing entirely.

I say we are responsible for our actions. If one decides to purposely crash their car into a wall, one might claim that they weren't in full control of their senses.

In that case, it could be argued that their license should be revoked.

 

[muhammad_isa]

If God, using his knowledge tells you truthfully that you are going to eat a ham sandwich at 12pm EST Feb 1, 2023, can you exercise your free will and choose to not have a ham sandwich on that date at that time?

If?
Are you now making up what G-d knows yourself?
It seems to me that you are.

One could also say "If God, using his knowledge tells you truthfully that you are NOT going to eat a ham sandwich at 12pm EST Feb 1, 2023" ...

If the answer is yes, then God was wrong and he is not omniscient.

G-d doesn't lie. That is a prior assumption, so it will not happen.

If the answer is no, then you can make no other choice and your do not have free will.

You can make whatever choice you like. You are the one who suggested what God knew .. you are not G-d.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I find it easier to not do many things considered sin when I'm not worried about sinning. Sure, I do those things, but not repressing it means I'm not obsessing over it.
And after I left it also became easier to be more tolerant and non-judgmental. Things Christians are supposed to do but often times miserable fail at.

We are responsible for our own souls.
G-d can forgive our trespasses, but eventually if we are not repentant, we could inflict upon ourselves "permanent" damage.

A parent who cares about their child will advise them not to do this or that, but if they don't listen, it will eventually catch up with them.
The prodigal son .. ended in happy ever after .. but only because they realised before it was too late.

We all sin. The greatest loss is to become defiant, and turn away from righteousness altogether.

 

[BilliardsBall]

That was a silly thing to say. We have been wrong about lots of things for thousands of years. From the causes of disease, to the earth going around the sun to slavery. Hell, you claim that all the people with religions that have been around for longer than your are wrong.

Are you claiming that they are stupid, and that only people who hold your beliefs are smart?

As I said, that was a silly thing to say

I am claiming that although I understand the NTS fallacy, it is unlikely (as Peterson said) that most people who've ever lived have been wrong about the divine.