Is the story of Judas completely absurd?

[Frozenwolf150]

And who subscribes to that idea?

You know, those bible-burning, baby-eating, moral-lacking straw atheists, living somewhere in the hollow cavity between your average apologist's ears, where they spend most of their time not permitting any possibility of a God. (Actually they secretly do believe in God, but just hate him so intensely that they call themselves atheists in order to insult him.)

 

[Radrook]

They just wanted to make sure they weren't arresting Brian by mistake...

I must admit I think the point people make about predestination and lack of free will is really weak. They way I see it, it is just like me knowing for a fact how my 5 year old son will react in a certain situation. The fact that I know him so well that I can predict his behaviour in certain circumstances doesn't mean he has no free will in those circumstances.

Exactly! Good example! Foreknowledge of events does not necessarily mean predestination of events.

 

[gdnp]

It is not foreknowledge that prevents free will, it is God's unalterable perfect plan.

 

[Radrook]

It is not foreknowledge that prevents free will, it is God's unalterable perfect plan.

But God does alter his plans if the circumstances permit it. In the case of Niniveh he changed his mind about destroying it as he had planned when the Ninevites expressed sincere repentance. This change of plan based on mercy angered his prophet Jonah who
had initially tried to evade his mission by setting sail for Spain. So free will wasn't prevented there despite God's plans. The following scripture demonstrates that God will change his plan if the situation changes due to human free will:


Jer. 18:7-10 --

If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.


Wouldn't this seem to indicate that human free-will can cause events to have multible possibilities? All of which can be foreseen
and consequences calculated for each?

http://www.tektonics.org/gk/godchangemind.html

BTW

Those who are dead-set on finding fault will now say God isn't infallibe. Which shows that no matter how God is described it's not really his personality or his attributes that are the real issue-it's the God concept or ID concept itself that causes the godless to begin their snarling and frothing at the mouth.

 

[JoeEllison]

But God does alter his plans if the circumstances permit it.

So, sometimes "God" is wrong? Nice to know.

 

[RobRoy]

Thanks for that. BTW, the Latin proverb "quod licet Iovi non licet bovi" comes to mind.

It certainly does. Except it should be "Jupiter's priests" in this case, rather than Jupiter himself.

It was purely meant as an illustration that if you want, a full trial can be held within a couple of hours, so that the Sanhedrin could also have convicted Jesus within the night.

Gotcha. I'm caught up now. Sorry to hold you back.

 

[skeptical]

I did not say there is only one type of atheism, In fact, I didn't even use the term atheism. I was merely responding to what appears to be one type of atheism, that which absolutely doesn't permit any possibility of a God. I thought that should be obvious.

I will repeat: I am not aware of a single person who holds the sort of view you were discussing. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it.

Also, I am NOT a mind-reader. So when someone tags belief in God or ID as totally absurd, then its only logical that I take that statement as an all-or-nothing one. So if you don't wish to be perceived that way please refrain from making all-or- nothing statements.

Saying a belief is absurd is the same as claiming it has extremely poor evidence for it, not that it is impossible. I would claim belief in Leprechauns is absurd because the evidence for them is extremely poor, but I would not claim it is impossible that Leprechauns exist.

BTW

My continually being forced to explain that I didn't mean what I am accused of meaning eventually becomes intolerably annoying and tiresome. Especially when one begins suspecting purposeful misrepresented for annoyance purposes. The only option then becomes the ignore button. So please, if not sure of what I meant, ask first instead of wasting time writing extended rebuttals in reference to something I didn't say.

The initial mistake was yours. You made a post about a position that I am fairly certain no one holds. If you don't understand what people mean by calling a belief "absurd", then perhaps you should ask first instead of wasting time creating posts attacking strawmen.

And BTW, this is a discussion forum. To discuss. Only an idiot would ask permission from another poster before responding to their post. Get over yourself.