Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
General Religious Discussion / Re: Will a Christian explain freewill to me
« Last post by natlegend on Yesterday at 06:08:21 PM »
Hello Jst, can you please give me an example of a person performing an action in a universe with no freewill? Thanks.

We could be like ants that just play follow the leader all day long, never wondering if we should do something else.

Like Adam and Eve? <--- yes that's a question.
52
Evolution & Creationism / Re: Young earth must be right
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 06:07:32 PM »
Ok, but your suggestion is indistinguishable from "it's magic". If God can circumvent the recognized laws of physics when he chooses to do so (as you say he could have done in your example), why can't he heal an amputee? It was meant to be a joke, but I'm more than happy to have this discussion if you really want to. Do you?
53
General Religious Discussion / republic, xian, famous and transitioning gender
« Last post by eh! on Yesterday at 06:06:30 PM »
that has to be some conflict to deal with;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Jenner

54
General Religious Discussion / Re: Will a Christian explain freewill to me
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 05:53:39 PM »
Jst, for fuck sake will you read what I actually say before you respond to it? I did not say can't, I said doesn't. If you honest-to-goodness do not recognize that there is a significant difference between the meaning of these two words, you need to stop talking.

I didn't say you said it.  I said it.
Then don't you think it's kind of disruptive and rude to sidestep addressing what I DID say in favor of what you wish to discuss instead? If that is the way you wish to communicate, it will be much more clear if you don't quote posts you aren't actually addressing in your response. You have established a pattern of avoiding engaging with the substance of what people say to you.

Quote
So please answer.  How are you going to get the answers that science can't answer?
Such as?

Quote
Or is it your position that science can answer all questions?
Do you always think in binary? Is the world really that black and white to you? You only see two options for any question?

<snip>
Quote
The purpose of religion is not to teach us science.
What is the purpose of religion?

Quote
  It would be like saying because science has taught us so much, we can't learn anything from history.  They just do not address the same things.
I don't think I suggested anything like this.

Quote
It is because of spirituality that we have such a desire to learn.  It is what gives humans that drive.  Perhaps you call it something else.  I call it spirituality.
Ah, that explains a lot. You are using a non-standard definition of spirituality. It would have been helpful if you had defined it this way in the beginning. I understand what you mean now. I don't agree, but I get what you are saying.

As I'm sure you expect, in light of the way you are using the word "spirituality", I return to science. Neuroscience, neuroplasticity, neuropsychology, and cognition research in particular. I also understand that this way of seeing things is much less attractive to you, but to me, it actually becomes much more beautiful and precious. It's truly amazing, I just recognize a different underlying thread than you do. String theory has some interesting philosophical implications, for instance.

Why is this always so hard jst?
55
General Religious Discussion / Re: Will a Christian explain freewill to me
« Last post by median on Yesterday at 05:44:22 PM »
No, you didn't coherently define "freewill". You engaged in question begging. At least two of us now have asked you for more information as to what you mean when you use the term "choose" and you have not coherently responded to it other than to question beg yet again. As a matter of fact, I asked you multiple questions in an attempt to drive deeper at what you think you mean when you use those terms...and still you didn't respond.

I do not owe you an explanation of anything.  You are not the one I was answering when I posted.  If I have to define common words like "choose" and "desire" for you then I am wasting my time.  Have you ever considered looking things up in a dictionary?

LOL. Nice dodge Mr. hypocrite. You are typing in public forum (i.e.- open discussion). And nowhere did anyone here claim that you "owe" them anything. So that's just another way of dodging the questions I asked you before (since they directly pertain to this exchange).

When the very necessary and sufficient conditions of a term are being debated, by which to gain clarity as to what one is talking about when they use said word or term (as is very common in the history of discourse), dictionary definitions are not always helpful. But your answer just sounds like another dodge b/c I didn't ask for what the dictionary stated. I asked for how you are using those terms (in your own words), and when you responded your answer was still question begging (as myself and others also pointed out).


Quote
No, it is you that is stuck in the rut since you haven't coherently defined the terms you are using such that they could be rationally distinguished from determined and/or non-free action.

I am under no complusion to satisfy your demands.  I submitted an answer to the orginal poster.  If I owe anything to anyone it is to that person.  You are not that person.  I don't owe you anything and you will take nothing from me by force.

As if it would even be possible for me to "take by force" an answer from you. Grow up. This is a public forum where all are exchanging, and in which you (in response to me earlier) have attempted a definition of "free will" (which pertains to this public OP and this discussion) in which I asked for clarification, you responded with a question begging answer (which did not answer the 3 questions I asked - and which all are welcome to chime in since it's public), and I then asked for further clarification. If you choose to ignore the questions, fine. But they are likely to come up again since they are very relevant (indeed foundational) to the debate on freewill.
56
Religion In The News / Re: Michelle Bachmann - still bonkers
« Last post by Nam on Yesterday at 05:42:22 PM »
Canada's closer. But they like their uhboots.

-Nam
57
Chatter / Re: My Free Speech Is Good Yours Is Not
« Last post by Nam on Yesterday at 05:39:45 PM »
Quote from: Mr. Blackwell
...

Again: I never said she was a racist. She could be, she could not be...I don't know. What I said was is the generalisation of the whole thing seems racist.

The George & Laura Bush picture, for all purposes, shows them walking on the American Flag. Yes, we here know it wasn't an actual flag it was a picture of a flag on a mat. The point nogodsforme and myself have been making, the people in the video who are black are making, and what these articles about this situation and others similar to it is: white people can get away with murdering a black person but a black person couldn't get away with murdering a white person[1]. A white person such as Bush can walk on a picture of the American flag but...say...Obama did it, those on the right[2] would whine bloody murder about it.

That is the hypocrisy embedded with racial overtones.

-Nam

 1. this is an analogy
 2. who are 90% white
58
I'm with Graybeard. His only reason for speaking before the UN was to say "Trust Jesus. That's the ONLY way to solve all the worlds' problems. I know because paramedics hit me with a defibrillator 10 times instead of the customary 4. Also, the doctors went ahead and ordered a DNA test just for shits and giggles and couldn't find a common genetic marker which would predispose me to having heart disease so obviously Jesus removed that genetic marker! Never mind that I don't provide a before and after snap shot of my genetic makeup so we'll well never know if I never had that particular genetic marker in the first place in order to prove it was later removed. My message is very simple, despite all the effort given to save my life by humans....I give Jesus all the credit. Thank you"

 Welp. That's great. Who the hell let him in?

59
General Religious Discussion / Re: How would you protect you children?
« Last post by eh! on Yesterday at 05:34:09 PM »
what is the point of prayer if god can not change it's mind?

whatever is going to happen is going to happen as determined by god at the time of creation of the universe 4000 years ago.
60
General Religious Discussion / Re: How would you protect you children?
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 05:30:08 PM »
I'm telling you that God cannot go against his own will
Interesting.

What I'm getting is you saying your god cannot change his mind. He is locked in to whatever path he initiated, regardless of the consequences. That's an interesting constraint. Did he foresee humankind as we are at this moment in time?

If so, this must be what he intended, therefore your effort to change minds is pointless, isn't it?

If not, then the inability to change direction once the path is initiated seems like a pretty substantial shortcoming in an all-powerful being, doesn't it?

Quote
If God determines to make free willed creatures then that's what he must do.  He can't somehow cheat his own will.  Why would he?
So, this is exactly what he intended - he won't intervene - or, he is unable to alter present circumstances - he can't intervene. You seem to hold both positions, depending on what is under discussion. Is that the case? If not, please clarify which position you hold.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10