The Question Islam and Christianity Can't Answer

[Kenny]

Foreknowledge Based on Foreordination: God's foreknowledge, according to the Scripture teaching, is based upon His plan or eternal purpose, which embraces everything that comes to pass. God is never represented as a mere onlooker seeing the future course of events, but having no part in it.

All I have to do is find one example that doesn’t match this person’s definition to prove it wrong.

2 Kings
20 In those days Hezekiah was sick and near death. And Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, went to him and said to him, “Thus says the Lord: ‘Set your house in order, for you shall die, and not live.’ ”

2 Then he turned his face toward the wall, and prayed to the Lord, saying, 3 “Remember now, O Lord, I pray, how I have walked before You in truth and with a loyal heart, and have done what was good in Your sight.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly.

4 And it happened, before Isaiah had gone out into the middle court, that the word of the Lord came to him, saying, 5 “Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of David your father: “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up to the house of the Lord. 6 And I will add to your days fifteen years.

God had foreknowledge of Hezekiah’s impending death - but it was subject to change.

 

[Kenny]

Do you believe God created the
process of birth? Then I guess it's his 'fault.'
It sounds to me your inquiry implies that 'it's bad' God created the process of birth based on your realization of how cruel my premise would be if it were true. That's the point, I don't believe God would be cruel in that way.

So… if your adult child decides to to murder someone that somehow you are guilty because you birthed them?

I don’t thinks so.

Somehow I think you don’t really want an answer to your question. Maybe because you are blaming God for what is wrong in lives?

 

[shunyadragon]

All I have to do is find one example that doesn’t match this person’s definition to prove it wrong.

No one person's 'opinion' does not match the widely accepted definition foes not ptove it wrong. This isa very foolish and naive notion.

2 Kings
20 In those days Hezekiah was sick and near death. And Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, went to him and said to him, “Thus says the Lord: ‘Set your house in order, for you shall die, and not live.’ ”

2 Then he turned his face toward the wall, and prayed to the Lord, saying, 3 “Remember now, O Lord, I pray, how I have walked before You in truth and with a loyal heart, and have done what was good in Your sight.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly.

4 And it happened, before Isaiah had gone out into the middle court, that the word of the Lord came to him, saying, 5 “Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of David your father: “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up to the house of the Lord. 6 And I will add to your days fifteen years.

God had foreknowledge of Hezekiah’s impending death - but it was subject to change.

You have not demonstrated God did not have foreknowledge of the outcome of Hezekiah's life. God knew the circumstances of the outcome of the events, and used as a lesson of obedience to the will of God,

 

[Kenny]

No one person's 'opinion' does not match the widely accepted definition foes not ptove it wrong. This isa very foolish and naive notion.

I didn’t give an opinion but history. Big dif.

You have not demonstrated God did not have foreknowledge of the outcome of Hezekiah's life. God knew the circumstances of the outcome of the events, and used as a lesson of obedience to the will of God,

You have not demonstrated that I am wrong. You are talking “predestination” and you would have to convince me of that position.

you are free to believe that if you want, but I just don’t agree. It’s called “free will” and not “puppet will"

 

[shunyadragon]

So… if your adult child decides to to murder someone that somehow you are guilty because you birthed them?

I don’t thinks so.

Somehow I think you don’t really want an answer to your question. Maybe because you are blaming God for what is wrong in lives?

Well God knew before hand the temptation and Fall of Adam and Eve and the result. He Created Adam and Eve with there fallible nature knowing they would eventually fail..

God would not be all knowing and all Wise if this was not the case.

 

[shunyadragon]

I didn’t give an opinion but history. Big dif.

You have not demonstrated that I am wrong. You are talking “predestination” and you would have to convince me of that position.

you are free to believe that

t if you want, but I just don’t agree. It’s called “free will” and not “puppet will"

It is not what I believe.

What Does the Bible Say About Foreknowledge?

Bible verses about Foreknowledge

www.openbible.info

Jeremiah 1:5 ESV​

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

Romans 8:29-30 ESV​

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

1 Peter 1:20 ESV​

He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you

Ephesians 1:4 ESV​

Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love

Ephesians 1:5 ESV​

He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,

Acts 2:23 ESV​

This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

Isaiah 46:10 ESV​

Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’

Psalm 139:4 ESV​

Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O Lord, you know it altogether.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Cause is not the issue. It is simply the nature of absolute foreknowledge by God. I do not believe that God claims foreknowledge of all events. Humans have at least a degree of Free Will.

How God having knowledge of future means, not having free will?

For example, you have knowledge that tomorrow, the Sun rises at what time. It does not mean, you are controlling it. You just know the future.
God is not limited to space or time. He just sees past and future.

 

[Kenny]

It is not what I believe.

What Does the Bible Say About Foreknowledge?

Bible verses about Foreknowledge

www.openbible.info

Jeremiah 1:5 ESV​

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

Romans 8:29-30 ESV​

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

1 Peter 1:20 ESV​

He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you

Ephesians 1:4 ESV​

Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love

Ephesians 1:5 ESV​

He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,

Acts 2:23 ESV​

This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

Isaiah 46:10 ESV​

Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’

Psalm 139:4 ESV​

Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O Lord, you know it altogether.

Yes, you can find scripture that will support your belief yet the interpretation may be wrong...

For an example:

Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live;

How can you choose if there is no choice because you are destined?

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God doesn’t want any to perish… but people perish. Choice/

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes, you can find scripture that will support your belief yet the interpretation may be wrong...

This is the problem with the scripture and Christianity contradictions abound and problems with the conflict with science and the contemporary world when one relies on ancient tribal scriptures. The ancient scripture also leads to a pessimism to ward the world. and negative sometimes violence against those that believe differently.

One note is that this discussion involves my view of the conflicts, contradictions and problems with ancient scripture without provenance and science in today's world, and not my beliefs.

The result is many questions Christianity, and Islam cannot answer.

 

[Kenny]

This is the problem with the scripture and Christianity contradictions abound and problems with the conflict with science and the contemporary world when one relies on ancient tribal scriptures. The ancient scripture also leads to a pessimism to ward the world. and negative sometimes violence against those that believe differently.

One note is that this discussion involves my view of the conflicts, contradictions and problems with ancient scripture without provenance and science in today's world, and not my beliefs.

The result is many questions Christianity, and Islam cannot answer.

I think the real problem is that you read scriptures and interpret it according to your beliefs even though there are other scriptures that contradict your position and you don’t know how to reconcile the differences.

It isn’t that we cannot answer your questions… it is that you don’t like our answers and you aren’t open to the answers.

 

[Link]

If future is known before it happens, it's determined and there is no real time free-will. People explaining how in real time, we have no choice, but to choose the one God knows, can be explained again and again, but people will just attack the conclusion.

 

[shunyadragon]

I think the real problem is that you read scriptures and interpret it according to your beliefs even though there are other scriptures that contradict your position and you don’t know how to reconcile the differences.

I read the scriptures of the Bible and the Quran as is and not how I want them to be, Yes there are other scriptures that contradict other scriptures that is the problem, Again this us not my beliefs not my position, but the reality of the scriptures as they are in reality;

Unless I have misunderstand your previous posts, you as a matter of fact do not apparently believe in the sciences of evolution, the natural history of the earth and the physics and cosmology of the universe billions of years ol old as is. You may qualify and conditionally accept some science, but in reality you do not accept science as science without religious qualifications,

Muslims like @Link also face the problem of the rejection of science based on ancient tribal scriptures,

It is interesting that by far the majority of Jews accept science as science, and the controversial interpretation of the Pentateuch is their scripture in Hebrew is resolved and not a problem, because they no longer believe in a literal Pentateuch.

It isn’t that we cannot answer your questions… it is that you don’t like our answers and you aren’t open to the answers.

It is matter of fact documented in many posts that the ancient tribal scripture cannot answer the questions of the modern world. The elephant in the room is the conflicts and contradictions with contemporary science, which results in widespread denial of science.

 

[Kenny]

I read the scriptures of the Bible and the Quran as is and not how I want them to be, Yes there are other scriptures that contradict other scriptures that is the problem, Again this us not my beliefs not my position, but the reality of the scriptures as they are in reality;

And I have gone through those “contradictions” and understand that

1. They misinterpret them
2. Can’t differentiate whether it is literal or not
3. Transcribing errors (especially in numbers)
4. Don’t know how to harmonize them
5. Didn’t study enough
6. And a variety of other reasons.

Probably the most important is “They don’t believe in Jesus so any reason is a good enough reason to reason it away"

Unless I have misunderstand your previous posts, you as a matter of fact do not apparently believe in the sciences of evolution, the natural history of the earth and the physics and cosmology of the universe billions of years ol old as is. You may qualify and conditionally accept some science, but in reality you do not accept science as science without religious qualifications,

This seems like a moving goal post.

But in answer:
1) I believe in science
2) I understand that science views things in as much as what they have discovered and understand but are always open to change when new information is given that may change current viewpoints (As an example… what to black holes really do and how does it affect things as it goes through it? What is on the other side of it?)
3) Bible doesn’t say how he created things so evolution could be the answer

So what does this have to do with anything except to accentuate the fact that you don’t believe?

It is matter of fact documented in many posts that the ancient tribal scripture cannot answer the questions of the modern world. The elephant in the room is the conflicts and contradictions with contemporary science, which results in widespread denial of science.

Again, another moving goal post. What does this have to do with anything? Maybe another thread to weed through? (Happy to do so)

 

[David1967]

You can know something will happen without directly causing it. We all exist in a complex web of relationships. In Christianity, the individual soul is given the choice as to how they respond to God's love. In Christian theology, God creates because that is within his nature, as God seeks to be known and have relationships with his creation. God is love, and since love is inherently relational being based on close social bonds, God had to create something other than himself. But as I stated, the soul is given the free will as to how it will respond to God. As with any community, we can refuse relations.

Anyway, that's my understanding of it from Christian theology.

As for Islam, it does not posit that God is "loving" or rather "love" as in Christianity. They approach God from a different paradigm. God is more the Ultimate Reality in Islam and, because of their theological reasonings, they are much more concerned with shirk or putting anything on remotely the same level with God.

To me, Free Will means nothing is written in stone on the individual level. I just can't accept that God would create someone just for the purpose of throwing them into hell. That would be horrible.

 

[Ignatius A]

Ir is true. Foreknowledge offers absolutely no options.

No, not relevant. First, you only have the foreknowledge if you actually caused the trains to collide. If you did not cause the trains to collide then you did not have foreknowledge. You simply saw the trains headed toward each other. It reality you would "know the trains collided until after it happened.

I beleive the subject is the foreknowledge of God, and not fallible humans like you or me.

That's pretzel logic. Foreknowledge is foreknowledge. It's not different for God than for fallible humans. In my example I have foreknowledge of a collision that foreknowledge does not make that collision happen. You confuse omniscience with omnipotence and have offered bo good argument for how they are the same.

 

[Ignatius A]

Yes, that is what I said. Shunya disagreed, but I think that he was thinking about an omniscient AND omnipotent agent.

If you learned to correctly predict all future events everywhere for all time the way I did for number matches on a particular pinball machine, but on the ultimate scale, you would have proven that the universe is deterministic, that libertarian free will doesn't exist, (thanks to Shunya for teaching me to add that first word to the next two to distinguish it from the illusion of free will), and that you were now omniscient. But if you're not also omnipotent, then you aren't the reason for any of those things or the source of the laws they follow and which you now use to predict their future behavior.

I have, but you haven't understood me.

Agree.

Disagree.

Agree, but it does mean that they are determined and not by the consciousness agent.

My answer is the same as the last time you asked it. "It doesn't. Knowing the future doesn't cause it." I don't believe I can explain that to you, either.

I don't know that any gods exist, but I do know what existence is. I can tell you the three qualities that all existing things possess and which no nonexistent entity possess. To exist is to be real or actual, that is, a part of reality, which means it can be found at some time in some place and can affect and be affected by other real, existent objects and processes. If a god can affect any part of nature at any time, then it exists, it exists in time, and it is a part of nature (reality).

Not anymore.

Time will exist long after there is no sun or earth.

Neither are the Martian rovers, but I'm pretty sure that they exist in time. Maybe you meant because God is not in the universe. That may well be. I see no evidence to the contrary.

Your problem is you think omniscience and omnipotence are the same thing. I hate to break it to you but there's no Santa Claus and they aren't the same thing.

 

[Ignatius A]

To me, Free Will means nothing is written in stone on the individual level. I just can't accept that God would create someone just for the purpose of throwing them into hell. That would be horrible.

You're right it would be horrible that's why he didn't do did. Love is most important to God. He loves us and wants us to live him but love not freely given is not love. He could have made it so everyone loved him but that's not love.

 

[RestlessSoul]

That was a response to, "Ask yourself how one could distinguish between a deterministic world and one where the future is not yet determined." I disagree. If the future were determined exclusively by the past unfolding under the laws of nature, and somebody derived the algorithm that describes all future states perfectly, that person would be demonstrating that future events are predetermined.

Doesn’t Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle predict that no algorithm, no supercomputer, and no Laplace demon can ever have sufficient information to describe all future states?

And there’s the degree of irreducible randomness in nature implicit in QM…

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I think the real problem is that you read scriptures and interpret it according to your beliefs even though there are other scriptures that contradict your position and you don’t know how to reconcile the differences.

The skeptic has no motive to try reconcile the contradictions in scripture. He just notes them. That's for believers to do. They need for the words to be accurate and coherent, and so they redefine words and invent meanings to reduce any cognitive dissonance. Pick one of two contradicting scriptures and explain the one you don't like in a way that makes it agree with the other scripture, and you can choose either and call it the correct understanding as written.

You've seen the discussions among believers regarding salvation by works and by faith alone. Believers pick the one they like and then attempt to explain how the other one supports them if they can, or just try to sanitize the contradiction away.

It isn’t that we cannot answer your questions… it is that you don’t like our answers and you aren’t open to the answers.

We reject the rationalizations. A day is a day. By works is not by faith alone. Jesus does not match the description of the OT messiah. OT law is in effect does not mean that OT law no longer applies. Libertarian free will is incompatible with omniscience. God exists outside of time yet he thinks and acts, which require before and after states (change).

These all represents contradictions in scripture and church doctrine that you but not I must rationalize. And yes, I reject the tortured, ad hoc explanations. The Bible writers made mistakes when they generated this story over generations and centuries. That's an acceptable conclusion for me, but not for you, so, you simply declare that there are no inconsistencies, that one just has to look at it the right way.

“They don’t believe in Jesus so any reason is a good enough reason to reason it away"

That's exactly backward. The skeptic doesn't have a dog in that hunt. He reports what the words he read mean. The believer in Jesus is the one rationalizing (motivated reasoning).

Your problem is you think omniscience and omnipotence are the same thing.

I explicitly made the distinction. Look at the top section in the post you quoted. I agreed with you.

You're right it would be horrible that's why he didn't do did. Love is most important to God. He loves us and wants us to live him but love not freely given is not love. He could have made it so everyone loved him but that's not love.

And here's some of that motivated thinking to sanitize the god and restore it to perfect goodness and justice despite the opposite being the case in the eyes of impartial readers. You cannot have a good god that damns souls for not obeying and worshiping it. That's what Trump would do to those he considers disloyal to him if he could, which includes people like me that he's never met and who have no relationship with him, just like that god. But if one assumes by faith that his god is good and just, then he finds a way to rationalize what is clearly injustice (sadism, actually) to people not making that assumption.

Doesn’t Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle predict that no algorithm, no supercomputer, and no Laplace demon can ever have sufficient information to describe all future states? And there’s the degree of irreducible randomness in nature implicit in QM

Yes, there are problems with the idea that the universe is deterministic and can therefore in principal if not practice be perfectly predicted. My points were that if that COULD be done, it would demonstrate that the world is perfectly deterministic and predictable, and that that would rule out the possibility of libertarian free will. I'm agnostic on the matter. I don't declare either omniscience or libertarian free will impossible, just incompatible. If one is the case, the other isn't.

 

[Ignatius A]

The skeptic has no motive to try reconcile the contradictions in scripture. He just notes them. That's for believers to do. They need for the words to be accurate and coherent, and so they redefine words and invent meanings to reduce any cognitive dissonance. Pick one of two contradicting scriptures and explain the one you don't like in a way that makes it agree with the other scripture, and you can choose either and call it the correct understanding as written.

You've seen the discussions among believers regarding salvation by works and by faith alone. Believers pick the one they like and then attempt to explain how the other one supports them if they can, or just try to sanitize the contradiction away.

We reject the rationalizations. A day is a day. By works is not by faith alone. Jesus does not match the description of the OT messiah. OT law is in effect does not mean that OT law no longer applies. Libertarian free will is incompatible with omniscience. God exists outside of time yet he thinks and acts, which require before and after states (change).

These all represents contradictions in scripture and church doctrine that you but not I must rationalize. And yes, I reject the tortured, ad hoc explanations. The Bible writers made mistakes when they generated this story over generations and centuries. That's an acceptable conclusion for me, but not for you, so, you simply declare that there are no inconsistencies, that one just has to look at it the right way.

That's exactly backward. The skeptic doesn't have a dog in that hunt. He reports what the words he read mean. The believer in Jesus is the one rationalizing (motivated reasoning).

I explicitly made the distinction. Look at the top section in the post you quoted. I agreed with you.

And here's some of that motivated thinking to sanitize the god and restore it to perfect goodness and justice despite the opposite being the case in the eyes of impartial readers. You cannot have a good god that damns souls for not obeying and worshiping it. That's what Trump would do to those he considers disloyal to him if he could, which includes people like me that he's never met and who have no relationship with him, just like that god. But if one assumes by faith that his god is good and just, then he finds a way to rationalize what is clearly injustice (sadism, actually) to people not making that assumption.

Yes, there are problems with the idea that the universe is deterministic and can therefore in principal if not practice be perfectly predicted. My points were that if that COULD be done, it would demonstrate that the world is perfectly deterministic and predictable, and that that would rule out the possibility of libertarian free will. I'm agnostic on the matter. I don't declare either omniscience or libertarian free will impossible, just incompatible. If one is the case, the other isn't.

You think they are the same but they aren't

BTW scripture is clear James 2:24 "You can see, then, that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone". I'm not sure how much more clear the message could be here. Anyone who reads that and STILL thinks we are saved by faith alone is either ignorant or a heretic.