PDA

View Full Version : ARCHIVE: pixel theology (the counting machine)



Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:20 AM
I created the animation below with great attention to detail.

What does the animation tell you about me?

Sozo
January 9th, 2003, 12:26 AM
You have no fourknowledge!

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog
You have no fourknowledge! :crackup:

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog
You have no fourknowledge! Clever!

I will wait for more feedback before I comment any further.

Oh Jaltus..... Oh JP.......

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 12:32 AM
You have no Four titude?

Xmansmommy
January 9th, 2003, 12:53 AM
ummmm Knight....Was it fourordained that you would be fourgetful, have no fourknowledge and have no fourtitude? Or are you just being silly four the sake of being silly? ;)

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:34 AM
The robot, (the counting box), has no choice but to count incorrectly, missing the 4, each and every time, because that is what it was programmed to do before it was ever born. The robot, of course does not realize this. As far as it is concerned (that is if you programmed for it to think it is concerned) it is counting the way it chooses to count, never realizing that it has been programmed to do exactly what it is doing, and can in no way effect a change in its decision to miss the four.

Am I close?

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 01:39 AM
Close?! If you aren't right I suggest we all give up.....how long did you marinate and ponder this great theological statement of Knight's?

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by Lion
The robot, (the counting box), has no choice but to count incorrectly, missing the 4, each and every time, because that is what it was programmed to do before it was ever born. The robot, of course does not realize this. As far as it is concerned (that is if you programmed for it to think it is concerned) it is counting the way it chooses to count, never realizing that it has been programmed to do exactly what it is doing, and can in no way effect a change in its decision to miss the four.

Am I close? Of course you are correct.... speaking on behalf of the robot errrrrrrrrr the animation.

But I asked....

What does the animation I created say about ME?

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 02:20 AM
It says you can't count! But are you repentant that you can't count :noid:

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 02:23 AM
Originally posted by Yxboom
It says you can't count! But are you repentant that you can't count :noid: That is one alternative.

But keep in mind....

I did state....
I created the animation below with great attention to detail.

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 02:33 AM
I must have marinated my brain too long…. hmmmmmmmm.

It says you are a square!

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 02:35 AM
What does the animation tell you about me?

That someone fourced you to make it?

Xmansmommy
January 9th, 2003, 02:39 AM
It tells me that your attention to detail is lacking ;X

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 02:48 AM
I created the animation below with great attention to detail.

What does the animation tell you about me?

That you are really…..Fourest Gump?

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 02:49 AM
It tells me that Knight is simplistic. ;) or would that be a simpleton :doh:

(edited to say: I think I'll shut up now. :o)

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 02:51 AM
I created the animation below with great attention to detail.

What does the animation tell you about me?

That you are wrong, or a liar?

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 03:01 AM
I created the animation below with great attention to detail.

What does the animation tell you about me?

That you are an Ov’er, not a closed viewer. Because an open viewer believes that the creator can change his mind. Where the closed viewer would have to maintain that once it is known by the creator there is no chance of change.

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 03:07 AM
You can't be sorry for what you intended.

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by Xmansmommy
It tells me that your attention to detail is lacking ;X No... I see my counting machine and I can determine it turned out exactly as I intended it to come out.

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by Yxboom
You can't be sorry for what you intended. Stop jumping ahead! Some things take time. :)

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 11:52 AM
So here is what we know so far.....

1. I created the counting machine below.
2. I created it with great attention to detail.
3. The counting machine was completed as intended.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 11:54 AM
It sounds to me to be akin to liberals reasoning.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 12:01 PM
. . . Liberals seem to have trouble counting and often leave out the obvious.

1013
January 9th, 2003, 12:08 PM
I say we blame the box. Down with the box! nothing against you knight, I mean, your box wants to skip four after all.

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:14 PM
Mara and 1013 LOL!!! :D.

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:18 PM
OK... let me tell you a little more about myself.

I actually DO know how to count! I know that 4 follows 3, and that 4 precedes 5. I know how to accurately count from 1 to 5.

So lets review what we know about me (so far):

1. I created the counting machine below.
2. I created it with great attention to detail.
3. The counting machine was completed as intended.
4. I know the proper way to count to 5.

...more to follow.

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 12:20 PM
You told us the box would count up to five, and then start over, and that the box turned out the way you had planned.

Therefore you are a liar. That’s what this tells me about you.

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 12:31 PM
I don't need a box to tell you that Lion :noid:

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Lion
You told us the box would count up to five, and then start over, and that the box turned out the way you had planned.

Therefore you are a liar. That?s what this tells me about you. :) The box DOES count up to five and start over!

I see no lie there.

pereynol
January 9th, 2003, 12:34 PM
1=1
2=2
3=3
5=4
done=5,
for some reason....

Sequence is counting, and the names of the numbers are arbitrary....

There is a parenthetical gap between the 3rd and the 5th, so that an unforseen dispensation may be added? ;)

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by pereynol
1=1
2=2
3=3
5=4
done=5,
for some reason....

Sequence is counting, and the names of the numbers are arbitrary....

There is a parenthetical gap between the 3rd and the 5th, so that an unforseen dispensation may be added? ;) Hey thats pretty clever!

And there may be many lessons we could learn from my counting machine but that isn't what I am getting at.

There are still a couple things I have not told you yet. :)

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 12:44 PM
YXBoom!-I think it’s time you lowered the BOOM! on the supposed God of pixel theology.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 12:45 PM
These punsters ought to be punished. ;)

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 12:47 PM
I know! Knight is obfuscating the truth! ;) (At least the truth about himself) :D

cirisme
January 9th, 2003, 12:48 PM
What does the animation tell you about me?

It tells me you have more time on your hands than I do.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by Sheepdog


Four what?

:doh:

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by cirisme


It tells me you have more time on your hands than I do. Dude......... NOBODY has more time on their hands than you! :D ;)

pereynol
January 9th, 2003, 12:53 PM
The box is meaningfully incomplete. The reflexive relationship between creator and creation raises questions and illicits meaning that an otheriwse complete box would not. These were the opinions of my cat, who is extremely profound; I go to him for advice whenever I am at a loss....

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by pereynol
The box is meaningfully incomplete. The reflexive relationship between creator and creation raises questions and illicits meaning that an otheriwse complete box would not. These were the opinions of my cat, who is extremely profound; I go to him for advice whenever I am at a loss.... ROTFL...:D

cirisme
January 9th, 2003, 12:58 PM
Dude......... NOBODY has more time on their hands than you!

...says the man who made the first post on this thread.

;)

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:00 PM
Being the God of the pixel universe you had always decided to create an animation box that would count to five and then start all over again, from eternity past and until eternity future, but since you had already known that the box would choose not to display the number 4 since the box had made that decision in eternity past at the exact same non-sequential, non-time, that you had decided to create the box with exact attention to detail, so you decided, in that same non-time, non instant, that you would not interfere with the box’s free will since you had given the box freedom to choose its own path and since the mere fact that you knew it would decide from eternity past that it would not show the number 4, even though it had not been created yet, that since its choice decided the future, that really wasn’t a future of course since it had already been determined in eternity past, which of course is the same as eternity future and eternity now, so in order for the box’s choice to be free even though it had already been set in the eternity of the future and even though you already knew what it was going to do, from eternity past, which of course since you had already foreseen this it was impossible for it not to turn out in exactly that way, so what this tells me is that you are a completely and 100% rational and logical God and that you are perfect from all the eternities, in fact from an eternity of eternities.

Is that about right?

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:00 PM
OK... let me tell you one more thing about me.....

Every time I watch my counting machine "play". I am disappointed when I do not see a 4 after the 3 and before the 5. No matter how many times I watch it play, I am always disappointed with the missing 4.

So lets review.....

1. I created the counting machine below.
2. I created it with great attention to detail.
3. The counting machine was completed as intended.
4. I know the proper way to count to 5.
5. I am disappointed when I watch my machine and there is no 4

If all of the above were true. What would those facts coupled with my creation tell you about me?

cirisme
January 9th, 2003, 01:03 PM
What would those facts coupled with my creation tell you about me?

It tells me your "4" key was broken. :)

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:04 PM
Lion.... ROTFL!!! :D That was funny. Although I cant make it the "post of the day" because I give that to you almost everyday! People are going to start thinking there is some serious nepotism going on if I pick you again. :D ;)

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:04 PM
I defer to my last post…

(Translation)-You are a slave to your foreknowledge.

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:07 PM
Originally posted by Lion
I defer to my last post?

(Translation)-You are a slave to your foreknowledge. OK... but what do the following two facts tell you about me......

3. The counting machine was completed as intended.


5. I am disappointed when I watch my machine and there is no 4

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:07 PM
Sadly JP and Jatus are not here to enjoy all of this. :(

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:09 PM
Oh man Lion, Now I've got a headache. ;)

Knight, based on your last piece of information, I think you're schizo!

uh-oh. *ducks* :noid:

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 01:11 PM
I REPENT for ever seeing such a box!

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Mara
Oh man Lion, Now I've got a headache. ;)

Knight, based on your last piece of information, I think you're schizo!

uh-oh. *ducks* :noid: I would say that is an EXCELLENT analysis of me!

(based on the facts at hand!)

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
I REPENT for ever seeing such a box!

Your repentence doesn't count for much. It isn't your box. And you can't unsee something. Perhaps in time you can forget it. ;)

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:14 PM
Question is, will Knight repent? ;)

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:17 PM
Who can tell if Knight will turn and relent, and turn away?

So Mara.....

Why do you think I am "schizo"? Summarize for me why you think that.

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:19 PM
Mara-Sheepdog-LOL!!!!

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:21 PM
Because you had foreseen that the box would not show the four, you built it exactly that way, even though you would rather have had it work correctly. Therefore you are a slave to your foreknowledge.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by Knight
Who can tell if Knight will turn and relent, and turn away?

So Mara.....

Why do you think I am "schizo"? Summarize for me why you think that.

You'd have to be, someone who creates something to work in a specific fashion and then is disappointed that it worked in that specific fashion. That is just plain crazy. You don't create a microwave to heat food and then be sorry that it does heat food. Only a schizo can hold two conflicting thoughts in harmony.

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by Lion
Because you had foreseen that the box would not show the four, you built it exactly that way, even though you would rather have had it work correctly. Therefore you are a slave to your foreknowledge. I'm sure you will repent of your answer soon.

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Mara


You'd have to be, someone who creates something to work in a specific fashion and then is disappointed that it worked in that specific fashion. That is just plain crazy. You don't create a microwave to heat food and then be sorry that it does heat food. Only a schizo can hold two conflicting thoughts in harmony. But what would you say to someone like Jaltus that MIGHT argue.....

Just because you KNOW that something will happen doesn't mean that you still cant be sorry or disappointed about it. Jaltus might say.... you know your kids might make a mess of their room yet you are still disappointed when they DO make a mess of their room.

What would you say about that argument? Maybe I am not "schizo" based on that argument?

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Mara


You'd have to be, someone who creates something to work in a specific fashion and then is disappointed that it worked in that specific fashion. That is just plain crazy. You don't create a microwave to heat food and then be sorry that it does heat food. Only a schizo can hold two conflicting thoughts in harmony. There is one who by that definition would fit the bill...

Genesis 1:31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Genesis 6:6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:29 PM
Hmmmm…I know that you are a dispensationalist, and I also know that they place great significance on the difference between circumcision and uncircumcision, so, does this have anything to do with fourskin?

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by Lion
Hmmmm?I know that you are a dispensationalist, and I also know that they place great significance on the difference between circumcision and uncircumcision, so, does this have anything to do with fourskin? Oh man.... now that was funny! :D :crackup:

Lion
January 9th, 2003, 01:34 PM
The difference is in the might. When you created the box, you didn’t think there might be a chance the box would miss the four. You knew the box would miss the four, so you built it that way. I would ask this; Since you knew the box would miss the four if you built it that way, why didn’t you decide to build it another way, one that your foreknowledge showed would show the four? Then you wouldn’t be the masochist that you apparently are.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by Knight
But what would you say to someone like Jaltus that MIGHT argue.....

Just because you KNOW that something will happen doesn't mean that you still cant be sorry or disappointed about it. Jaltus might say.... you know your kids might make a mess of their room yet you are still disappointed when they DO make a mess of their room.

What would you say about that argument? Maybe I am not "schizo" based on that argument?

There is a big difference between a God who is supposed to every single action that will ever happen and when those actions will occur and a parent who could only guess.

If one has perfect knowledge of a creation, they should never be disappointed in what that creation does.

If the parent knew that at 2PM on Monday, their child would make a total mess of their room, the parent would not be disappointed. However parents have no such knowledge then they can be either disappointed or happy with the child, himself.

A God who has perfect knowledge of all future things, cannot be either disappointed with us. In fact he cannot be happy with us either. He can only be happy that his creative powers are sufficient.

Only A God, who only knows the future events that He, Himself intends to bring about, can be genuinely disappointed or happy with us as individuals.

[sidenote: The reason that God doesn't know the future (with the exception of the things that God determines to bring about himself) is that the future hasn't been written yet. The future doesn't exist, yet.]

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by Lion
The difference is in the might. When you created the box, you didn’t think there might be a chance the box would miss the four. You knew the box would miss the four, so you built it that way. I would ask this; Since you knew the box would miss the four if you built it that way, why didn’t you decide to build it another way, one that your foreknowledge showed would show the four? Then you wouldn’t be the masochist that you apparently are.

Yeah, I thought of that, but I knew what Knight was going for. :p ;)

(Edited to say: It is quite difficult to find an example of God among the imperfect.)

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:47 PM
Darn... that Mara is one smart puppy!

Can I ask one more follow-up question?????

Does it make any difference whatsoever..... if I know that the 4 is missing through my direct creation of the missing 4..... or if by someway I just knew (exhaustively) that the 4 would be missing? Is my disappointment misplaced in both scenarios?

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
There is one who by that definition would fit the bill...


Nitpicker! :D But if God had perfect fourknowledge of his creation and all that it would ever do, then he would have known ahead of time that his creation (namely man) would fall. To create man knowing that it would fall and then be sorry that it did, that's schizo!

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by Mara


Nitpicker! :D But if God had perfect fourknowledge of his creation and all that it would ever do, then he would have known ahead of time that his creation (namely man) would fall. To create man knowing that it would fall and then be sorry that it did, that's schizo! OK... Mara... who are you and where did you come from? :D

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by Mara


Nitpicker! :D But if God had perfect fourknowledge of his creation and all that it would ever do, then he would have known ahead of time that his creation (namely man) would fall. To create man knowing that it would fall and then be sorry that it did, that's schizo!

Not only that, but if you know for certain that your creation is going to mess up ahead of time; why on Earth (or in Heaven) would you do something that you know will fail. That's just plain stupid -- something that we know God is not!

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by Knight
OK... Mara... who are you and where did you come from? :D

:-X

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 01:56 PM
Okay I'll give you a hint; I live one time zone away from you.

:D

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:57 PM
I still expect to see a 4 after the 3 even though I created the counting machine intentionally leaving out the 4!

Am I "schizo" as mara asserts????

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by Mara
Okay I'll give you a hint; I live one time zone away from you.

:D Well that narrows it down. :rolleyes:

Yxboom
January 9th, 2003, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by Mara
Okay I'll give you a hint; I live one time zone away from you.
Well, that isn't far away at all. Don't Ya think?

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
Well, that isn't far away at all. Don't Ya think?

Party pooper! :p

Knight
January 9th, 2003, 02:21 PM
I should have known with the LOTR sig! Nerd alert, nerd alert! :D ;)

(just teasin')

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by Knight
I should have known with the LOTR sig! Nerd alert, nerd alert! :D ;)

(just teasin')

:p Takes one to know one! <--Yeah, I know that that is juvenile, but you reduced me to such lows. :D

1013
January 9th, 2003, 02:39 PM
There is a parenthetical gap between the 3rd and the 5th, so that an unforseen dispensation may be added?

this might work but not with the dispensationalists here, even though they are open viewers. That's because they say there are twelve dispensations and if God adds one more, that would be unlucky.

Mara
January 9th, 2003, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by 1013


this might work but not with the dispensationalists here, even though they are open viewers. That's because they say there are twelve dispensations and if God adds one more, that would be unlucky.

Do you think God is superstitious?

1013
January 9th, 2003, 06:56 PM
no, he's epistemically justified in knowing that 13 is an unlucky number.

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by Sheepdog
Has Knight foursaken this thread? No... just waiting to see if any closed viewers show up. :D

KamiQuasi
January 10th, 2003, 01:14 AM
Originally posted by Knight
I created the animation below with great attention to detail.

What does the animation tell you about me?

Well, this being my first post here at TOL I thought it fun to give my two cents worth. Here are the things I observe from the knowledge that was given in your first post and also through the animation.

1. You have claimed creation by writing your name on it
2. You have high expectations of your creation (hence claiming the attention to detail).
3. Your expectations are not complete in the creation.
5. You are still pleased with the creation, because it continues to do what you programmed it to, even if it isn't quite up to expectations. (Otherwise you wouldn't be showing it off, and you would take your name off of it, and forsake it to eternal damnation.)
done. You must intervene to resolve the fault(s) of your creation.

And that's what I think.

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by KamiQuasi


Well, this being my first post here at TOL I thought it fun to give my two cents worth. Here are the things I observe from the knowledge that was given in your first post and also through the animation.

1. You have claimed creation by writing your name on it
2. You have high expectations of your creation (hence claiming the attention to detail).
3. Your expectations are not complete in the creation.
5. You are still pleased with the creation, because it continues to do what you programmed it to, even if it isn't quite up to expectations. (Otherwise you wouldn't be showing it off, and you would take your name off of it, and forsake it to eternal damnation.)
done. You must intervene to resolve the fault(s) of your creation.

And that's what I think. Thanks Kami!!! Welcome to TOL (keep your thick skin handy).

Let me ask you this....

When I created my counting machine I intentionally left off the 4 (even though I do know how to count). Yet I still EXPECT to see a four when my counting machine counts. What does THAT tell you about me?

Yxboom
January 10th, 2003, 12:00 PM
You left your medication at momma's house?

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by Yxboom
You left your medication at momma's house? Actually Mara already pegged me right on but I thought Kami might want to take a shot at it.

Not to mention we are still holding out hope that Dee Dee, JP or Jaltus may want to join the fun.

KamiQuasi
January 10th, 2003, 01:21 PM
If you EXPECT a 4, then it means that your expectations are perfect, but your creation is not.

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by KamiQuasi
If you EXPECT a 4, then it means that your expectations are perfect, but your creation is not. Well... I think your ignoring the fact that I have addmitted the machine was created "as intended" and I am happy with it!

KamiQuasi
January 10th, 2003, 02:05 PM
The fact that you created it without the four and yet still expect a 4 tells me that you are looking for your creation to go beyond its programming. In other words, you want your creation to become perfect regardless of its programming.

1013
January 10th, 2003, 02:07 PM
and I am happy with it!

you mean happy in your work with it right?




I just wanted to add that once you punish this box knight, it will be glorious!

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by KamiQuasi
The fact that you created it without the four and yet still expect a 4 tells me that you are looking for your creation to go beyond its programming. In other words, you want your creation to become perfect regardless of its programming. So... you don't find it odd that I created something "as intended" yet expect something else from it?

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by 1013
I just wanted to add that once you punish this box knight, it will be glorious! LOL!! Wouldn't that be REALLY odd of me? To punish the box for not displaying the 4... even though I intentionally left out the 4?

Mara
January 10th, 2003, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by Knight
So... you don't find it odd that I created something "as intended" yet expect something else from it?

Knight, you really need to get some help! I hear that schizophrenia can be terminal if left untreated. ;)

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by Mara


Knight, you really need to get some help! I hear that schizophrenia can be terminal if left untreated. ;) Really? EGAD man! :shocked:

Mara
January 10th, 2003, 03:20 PM
And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. --Mark 3:25

Neither can God be divided against Himself. He cannot hold two opposing thoughts at the same time; for in doing so, He would be denying himself (2 Tim 2:13)

Knight
January 10th, 2003, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by Mara


Neither can God be divided against Himself. He cannot hold two opposing thoughts at the same time; for in doing so, He would be denying himself (2 Tim 2:13) So are you asserting that God REALLY was "sorry" in Gen 6 and God REALLY was "expecting good grapes" in Isaiah 5??????

Genesis 6:6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, ?I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.

Isaiah 5:1 Now let me sing to my Well-beloved A song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard: My Well-beloved has a vineyard On a very fruitful hill. 2 He dug it up and cleared out its stones, And planted it with the choicest vine. He built a tower in its midst, And also made a winepress in it; So He expected it to bring forth good grapes, But it brought forth wild grapes. 3 ? And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, Judge, please, between Me and My vineyard. 4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes?

Mara
January 10th, 2003, 03:59 PM
Uh . . . yeah! But I'll let God speak for himself:


And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. -- Exodus 3:14


God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? --Num 23:19

Mara
January 10th, 2003, 04:05 PM
Besides if God were so unchanging that He could not be sorry for making man (after they took their free will and shoved it back in His face), it would make him no different than the false gods who God set himself above.

Shadowx
January 10th, 2003, 10:44 PM
Such behavior sounds too much like "our" ways yet God says His ways are higher than our ways.
2 WILLS opposed to one another.
Is God really divided against himself?

matt 12 and Luke 3:26. And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

Jesus says such a concept in Matt 12, Luke 3, has its "end" it can't stand..it doesn't work..the idea is flawed and can't maintain itself
unless it is possible for God to destroy himself it can't work.

Like your box..You made it to leave out the number 4 that is what you wanted..but you continue to look for it and are disappointed its not showing up..
Do you foreknow the future see you are going to be disappointed then create the box anyways?
Do you not know though you may be happy now with it that in the "future" you will have regrets?
If you can see into the future that your created box will make you unhappy and regretful and disapointed..then you must want to be so.
are you "happy" being in conflict with yourself does it bring you pleasure?
that doesn't sound like a healthy state to be in..

so....you still keep looking intently for the #4 and are disappointed
only if there is the "possibility" of a 4 coming into the picture would it make sense "to me" for you to be watching for it to begin with and then if it doesn't be disappointed in it
otherwise you are disappointed in your own actions not the boxes..

the idea that God has 2 wills that work against each other, that he is divided against himself is bizarre

Matt 12:24
24. But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
25. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
26. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

Luke 3:26. And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

Does what the Pharisees say sound familiar?
..this idea is still with us today.....I'm glad to see Jesus refuting it above..

Jesus says "Every kingdom" or "house" or "Being" divided against itself CANNOT STAND...it is brought to desolation and has an END.

God is not divided against himself...(I see Mara has beat me to it)..

Jeremiah:19: 4. **Because they have forsaken me** ,and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents;
5. They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind:

Did God predestinate the Israelites to murder there children, and say nope it wasn't me.?
He says, it was because YOU FORSOOK me..not because I was present in your actions, but because I WAS ABSENT in them, I did not command this...He tells us why this happened..in verse 4 above.

Romans 1 "Because they did not think it worth while to retain God in there knowledge" God turned them over to there OWN ways..that's the logical natural consequences of rejecting his ways, we are then left to our **own** ways..its what we choose..as did the Israelites in Jeremiah 19.

Isaiah 13:58 If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from **doing thy pleasure** on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honour him, not doing **thine own ways**, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking **thine own words**:

Our ways and Gods ways are often opposed to one another theyre not the same..
the statement in Jer 19 above makes no sense at all if total predestination is to be believed..
it can only make sense if God is divided against himself..in that he predestined them not to do it and to do it at the same time even though he says I did not have anything to do with it..its because you have "Forsaken" me..such a concept of God that some try to present is straight up goofy
it would again show God is divided against himself..he clearly makes a distinction over and over between "our" ways which are OUR own, and His.

Isaiah 66:3. He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, **they have chosen their own ways**, "and their soul delighteth in their abominations".

you expecting something from your box that you have not allowed for then getting disappointed in ("it"?) is schizophrenic..


the Question that is begging is.. "Can we know what Gods ways are" is God always "Righteous", "holy" and what does that mean?
I believe we can...I believe in part its "intuitive"
Romans 1-2 and then we have of course his written Word.

Does He.. really build boxes like knights..
Does he do things he knows ultimately will lead him to disappointment?
when we think of behavior like that..it.. seems to be associated with the "unhealthy" rather then the "healthy"

I would much rather have a creation that in part could choose to act independently of me..
(God said of Adam "Let us "see" what he will name them (animals)")
having a remote controlled robot that can only do what I tell it and pushing buttons to get it to do what I want is one thing
creating one with the ability to act to some extent by itself apart from me...while still having the final say..in that if it doesn't behave in a healthy way..and does harm to others.. I can dismantle it..
now that would be "interesting"..

"4" the Record.
I Believe God is "sovereignly" healthy.

Mara
January 11th, 2003, 12:29 AM
Well said, Shadow X!

1013
January 11th, 2003, 02:31 PM
Besides if God were so unchanging that He could not be sorry for making man (after they took their free will and shoved it back in His face), it would make him no different than the false gods who God set himself above.

interesting that the author of genesis did not sare this concern as he felt free to write that God felt sorry for making man.

Mara, I think you'll find a thread in this forum interesting.

It's called "God repenting and Nachum." It's archived.

1013
January 11th, 2003, 02:40 PM
ach! never mind! I just read your comment again and it says the opposite of what I thought it said.

Mara
January 11th, 2003, 03:08 PM
It's okay. You sound overworked. Therefore I prescribe the following treatment. Grab yourself a cup of coffee (or whatever beverage you desire) and relax. :D

Knight
January 13th, 2003, 09:29 PM
All this fun and still no sign of Dee Dee, Jaltus or JP. Shame. :(

Knight
January 13th, 2003, 11:11 PM
bump

KamiQuasi
January 13th, 2003, 11:20 PM
So, I have been patiently enduring to know what the lesson to this story will be. Do we ever get to find out what exactly we missed in all the discussion? I still think at least one of us hit it with our comments, but then again I also think you would've told us.

I guess my last comment will be that you programmed it that way simply so you could then fix it, thus showing the animation that you were in control. You programmed the error merely as a means to an end. A way to allow yourself reason to be given all the glory. Much like a parent allows their children to learn from their mistakes, and yet then makes helpful correction to actions in order to show that they still care.

If that isn't it then I just can't wait to see what you have come up with.

Knight
January 13th, 2003, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by KamiQuasi
So, I have been patiently enduring to know what the lesson to this story will be. Do we ever get to find out what exactly we missed in all the discussion? I still think at least one of us hit it with our comments, but then again I also think you would've told us.

I guess my last comment will be that you programmed it that way simply so you could then fix it, thus showing the animation that you were in control. You programmed the error merely as a means to an end. A way to allow yourself reason to be given all the glory. Much like a parent allows their children to learn from their mistakes, and yet then makes helpful correction to actions in order to show that they still care.

If that isn't it then I just can't wait to see what you have come up with. Oh this moral has indeed been answered. Pay special attention to Mara and Shadow X's responses....

After you comment on those I will summarize....

If you desire.

Yxboom
January 13th, 2003, 11:29 PM
Welcome KamiQuasi to TOL :thumb:

KamiQuasi
January 14th, 2003, 01:04 AM
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness...So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Genesis 1:26a,27


Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- Genesis 3:22

So let me address the problem of a seemingly contradictory God:

Comparing your animation to the creation of man leads me to the question, "What is it that God left out of man at creation?" or at the very least, "What does the Bible say man was not endowed with at creation?"

1. Knowledge of Good and Evil
2. Eternal or Infinite Life

So, the question remaining is, "What does the 4 represent?"

Neither option makes God contradict Himself.
He created us without knowledge of good and evil because all of creation WAS good.


"Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good." Genesis 1:31

So far the only thing I can get from this is that God had the best of intentions...perfect, in fact, much like himself. Create something that was not a robot (as ShadowX brought up) that could glorify God...and have a relationship with Him, which means had to have the capacity for good (nothing contradictory about that).

As for not giving man the gift of eternal life...it was to be a gift, and given in God's own timing. We see that God had/has every intention of giving us that.


"And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last. Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city." Revelation 22:12-14

So it just lends itself that God would not have created, then protected (after the fall), and then given us the tree of life, if he had not planned to do so in the first place. The unplanned thing, was that man ate of the tree of knowledge, and forced God's hand. This was a disappointment, and it is no surprise that He was actually disappointed at having created man at all. In fact, even his disappointment doesn't contradict His nature.

There, that is my closing comment. Well, at least until my next post.

Knight
January 14th, 2003, 07:27 PM
Kami....

Some say.....

That God planned all of the future. He ordained every movement of every molecule for all of history.

Others say....

That God foreknows all of the future in every exhaustive detail, although He didn't specifically ordain it to happen in just that way.

Both of the above views make God seem "schizo" (as Mara would put it) in light of Bible verses such as:

Genesis 6:6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, ?I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.

Isaiah 5:1 Now let me sing to my Well-beloved A song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard: My Well-beloved has a vineyard On a very fruitful hill. 2 He dug it up and cleared out its stones, And planted it with the choicest vine. He built a tower in its midst, And also made a winepress in it; So He expected it to bring forth good grapes, But it brought forth wild grapes. 3 ? And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, Judge, please, between Me and My vineyard. 4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes?

Those that say that God didn't ordain the future but the He KNOW's the future in exhaustive detail argue that one can still feel "sorry" or still "expect" different results even if one knows the future. Like a father still being disappointed that his child made a mess of his room even though the father expected it would happen.

This demonstration shows the folly of that view.

Suspicion is all together different than exhaustive foreknowledge and therefore the comparison is in error.

If God knew the future in exhaustive detail He would be "schizo" to expect other than what He knew to be true.

Maybe God really was sorry and maybe God really did expect good grapes. Maybe the Bible really means just what it says! Praise the Lord!

Knight
January 1st, 2005, 11:07 PM
This is a really cool old thread.

I thought I would bump it up!

:spam:

Knight
January 1st, 2005, 11:08 PM
It's best if read from the start. If I don't say so myself. :D

Lucky
January 1st, 2005, 11:49 PM
I bet I'm asking four trouble. :eek:

Knight
January 2nd, 2005, 12:12 AM
Originally posted by Lucky

I bet I'm asking four trouble. :eek: LOL :thumb:

Lucky
January 2nd, 2005, 12:23 AM
It was an interesting read, btw. :up:

Knight
January 2nd, 2005, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by Lucky

It was an interesting read, btw. :up: Did you read it up to post #116?

Lucky
January 2nd, 2005, 12:41 AM
Yessir.