Mr_Anony2:
While I agree with you in principle and I understand your analogy is meant to portray, I think your analogy doesn't explain the point perfectly. God being outside time, cannot have a linear view of time i.e there is no past and future with Him. God is ever-present. This may be difficult to wrap one's head around because man's experience of time is linear. The point however remains that the fact that God can predict a man's choices does not mean that therefore the man is not indeed making those choices. probably, I will expand on this further after Kay 17 gives a response.

Ihedinobi:

It's more a question of whether or not you were indeed following his arguments. If somehow his arguments haven't already answered your question and he thinks they have (as indeed he has said he does), you could show him how he might be mistaken and thus place him under obligation to answer your question. I personally hold that you atheists and agnostics are too proud to even consider that you are wrong or don't know everything you need to and ought to know. I hold that you are all expert at making excuses to escape bowing to arguments that discomfit your position. So, it's only on whims that I would bother to engage you. You should turn to Anony and tell him how his arguments failed to answer this 'new' question of yours.

Logicboy03:


Yawn. We know the usual. Avoid my argument, ridicule my intelligence and praise yourself.


FYI; you are still a fake copy of a dubious apologist.

Mr_Anony2:
Provide the contradicting posts please

InesQor:
LOL


Agreed. We can only try.


I accept that


Yes I believe the viewer is outside of the Universe, and this is why he is not limited by it. Otherwise Omniscience makes no sense. Only an agent outside the Universe can be omniscient.


How are you so certain about the bolded statement above: "But God is in our Universe"?


Nah. It's all related.

musKeeto:
You and I know both know I won't.

InesQor:

I understand and appreciate the same. My usage of "past" and "future" is anthropocentric, and was for the sake of clarity.

Mr_Anony2:
Then your claim can be discarded as having no basis

Ihedinobi:

Lol @ bold. Haven't I always told you that not everyone is like you?

Logicboy03:



Good. Assuming God exists and he created the world and he is omnipotent (therby omnipresent), God is everywhere- that means in and out of our universe.

Hey, we are moving away from the original argument of freewill and an omnipotent God

mazaje:

I made my points and asked a simple question. . .he refused to answer it. . .he then used the analogy I presented to answer a very different question from what i initially asked all because he wanted to divert and change the line of argument. . .I insisted he answered my question and he said he wouldn't. . .I know his tactics. .Luckily others here saw what he was up to and voiced out. . .

InesQor:
Fa Fa Fa Fa Faol! LOL

Omnipotent does not mean "thereby omnipresent".

Yeah we digress. My apologies.

musKeeto:
Same with your God claims..

Logicboy03:

Omnipotent- ability to do everything

Omnipresent- ability to be everywhere


Make the logical connection. How would one be omnipotent without being omnipresent? Omnipotent means you have to be omnipresent as well

Ihedinobi:

Oh, why did I even bother? These 'others' you're appealing to are people I hold to be at least as dense as you. What's the point of pointing me to them? Have you shown how his whole argument failed to deal with your initial 'simple' question? That you asked two questions does not mean that in answering one, Anony failed to answer the other. You do understand that, right?

InesQor:
No sir. An agent can be omnipotent and CHOOSE (haha freewill again) to manifest where desired without being everywhere at once.

I personally believe God is omnipresent but your logical conclusion is not contingent.

InesQor:
No sir. An agent can be omnipotent and CHOOSE (haha freewill again) to manifest where desired without being everywhere at once.

I personally believe God is omnipresent but your logical conclusion is not contingent.

Mr_Anony2:
You are making the mistake of expecting logicboy to actually employ his non-existent rational faculties? I wish you luck.

Mr_Anony2:
You are making the mistake of expecting logicboy to actually employ his non-existent rational faculties? I wish you luck.

InesQor:
iLOL

Logicboy03:


lol......I actually thought that you were better than them.

You know, I actaully thought we were having a proper discussion



Well f4ck me right? What do I know? I am just an illogical logicboy

InesQor:
Nah I think I'm the worst of the lot.

Yes, I also thought we were having a proper discussion but you were not seeing my point so I thought maybe I should drop it. Call it cowardice but nowadays I am always ready to agree to disagree if necessary.

mazaje:

Pls what are you on about here?. . .Where did I asked two questions?. . .i asked one question and anony created a question out of it and answered his own question, when I asked mine he said he wouldn't answer. . .Just to cut the chase here it goes let me ask you the question. . .I said I hold that the free will argument doesn't really makes sense because even the bible does say that some people are without freewill and I cited some passages that stated so. . .The dire consequence of the entire thing as presented by christian theology is what does not make any sense to me that was why i asked the question. . .

Here now is my question to you. . .Assuming you know before hand that your child whom you love so much will disobey you, take your car keys and end up having an accident that will leave him dead. . .Will you drop your keys where he will have access to it or keep it out of his reach? if you keep the keys where he will have access to it he will die off but if you keep it out of his reach he will remain alive. . .Pls let me have your answer. .

Ihedinobi:

You're kidding me, right?

mazaje:

I am asking you a question. . .What is your answer?. . .

Mr_Anony2:
From where I stand, it is unnecessary that I answer the question posed by this analogy since we have already tackled the underlying argument behind it sufficiently.

Ihedinobi:

You're kidding me, right?

Logicboy03:

Dont worry Majaze, everyone is seeing that Ihedinobi is dodging! Imagine asking if you are kidding after repeating the question!

Anony dodged the question and changed the topic, did you expect his disciple to do any better?

musKeeto:


[img]http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Portals/0/images/gifs/table-tennis.gif[/img]

mazaje:

I am asking you a question. . .What is your answer?. . .

Ihedinobi:

It's more a question of whether or not you were indeed following his arguments. If somehow his arguments haven't already answered your question and he thinks they have (as indeed he has said he does), you could show him how he might be mistaken and thus place him under obligation to answer your question. I personally hold that you atheists and agnostics are too proud to even consider that you are wrong or don't know everything you need to and ought to know. I hold that you are all expert at making excuses to escape bowing to arguments that discomfit your position. So, it's only on whims that I would bother to engage you. You should turn to Anony and tell him how his arguments failed to answer this 'new' question of yours.

mazaje:
Here now is my question to you. . .Assuming you know before hand that your child whom you love so much will disobey you, take your car keys and end up having an accident that will leave him dead. . .Will you drop your keys where he will have access to it or keep it out of his reach? if you keep the keys where he will have access to it he will die off but if you keep it out of his reach he will remain alive. . .Pls let me have your answer. .