Religious/Philosophical discussion, your thoughts Options

[TetraGrammaton C...]

this thread was inspired by the atheist video thread

we have not had one of these in a while. i thought it would be interesting if people wanted to have an ungoing discussion about what beliefs/morals/religious ideas/scruples they have and why they have them.

i will try to interject myself as a catalyst when i have time.

i would ask that no one is too inconsiderate of other people's ideas. however, i do not think their is anything wrong with light humor or logical criticism.



as for religious trends, it seems that our generation is having difficulties with Christianity, ranging from "I'm spiritual, not religious" to the casual "Christian" that does not really believe in Jesus, but believes in the Christian god. I have met several people who treat religion like a buffet, picking and choosing which particular characteristics of the ethos that seem most suitable. this seems to be indicative of a deterioration of religion in general, as if what was once considered dogmatic is now flexible and relative. aside from the particular personal relevance to our own lives, there also exists a greater societal relevance. what will change in our country if we are on a religious downslope? can religion die out or is it cyclical? who will win flying shark vs. flying crocodile? what about a flying spaghetti monster? does it come with breadsticks? when was the last time you ate at olive garden? etc. etc.

[Spectatrix]

I believe in Eris, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and the Invisible Pink Unicorn. I did my part for the FSM by dressing up as a pirate for a birthday party in September.

More seriously, though, I'm an atheistic agnostic. Specifically, I'm a "weak" atheist and a "weak" agnostic. The former means that, while I lack a belief in a deity, I do not have a strong, absolute conviction against his/her/its/their existence. Such would be inconsistent with agnosticism. By "weak" agnostic I mean that I currently have not seen any convincing proof or disproof of a deity's existence, but I acknowledge that I may possibly come across such proof or disproof in the future. A strong agnostic, on the contrary, believes that there is not and never shall be any proof either for or against the existence of a god(dess).

Weak and strong atheism
Weak agnosticism
Strong agnosticism

This post has been edited by Spectatrix: Dec 4 2006, 12:58 AM

[GOB]

I have met several people who treat religion like a buffet, picking and choosing which particular characteristics of the ethos that seem most suitable.

pretty much every protestant i know who considers themselves religious follows this. i don't agree with it, but i don't really care. at least they believe in something, even if it changes every other week.

[Spectatrix]

Oh yeah, as to why I have my beliefs...

With the agnosticism, it's simply because I haven't seen anything to convince me that there either is or isn't a god. I have seen/experienced stuff that I would consider proof of paranormal phenomena, like telepathy and psychokinesis, but no evidence of a god...

... which leads me to the atheism. I see no reason to believe in something that I have no proof of. Even when I was dabbling in paganism, I was going through the motions of spells/rituals, but I didn't believe in any of the pantheons or mythology. *shrugs*

[psidancer]

I was a fairly religious person until I came out to my youth pastor in high school. He told me if I prayed God would change me... Long story short, I've hardly stepped foot back into a church since.

I'd consider myself a strong atheist now, although I do my best to not try to be one of those bitter church bashing atheists.

[chook]

I was a fairly religious person until I came out to my youth pastor in high school. He told me if I prayed God would change me... Long story short, I've hardly stepped foot back into a church since.

I'd consider myself a strong atheist now, although I do my best to not try to be one of those bitter church bashing atheists.

Reminds me of a young Dr. Dini

[chook]

I am a subpar Catholic. I was raised by staunch catholics, and would of abandoned the faith if not for intelligent Religious figures I've met. Natural Law (minus or plus religion) is a really good philosophy.

Do good, avoid evil.

[FORSAKENR320]

I am a subpar Catholic. I was raised by staunch catholics, and would of abandoned the faith if not for intelligent Religious figures I've met. Natural Law (minus or plus religion) is a really good philosophy.

Do good, avoid evil.

i'm actually truelly curious about this:: does catholicism have any strong views about interracial relationships? or is it just the close-minded people that tend to speak their mind the most that make it seem that way? and if catholicism DOES have anti-interracial views, how does it feel to know you are going to burn in hell for having yellow fever?




i believe in a god. i do not believe in jesus, or in particular the "christian" god. i believe that there is a supreme being out there who made us for his own amusement, and who judges us based on what we do in life to either go to "hell" or heaven" i don't believe that this god-figure will step in, help out, answer prayers, or anything like that. he made the world the way he wanted it, and now he sits back and watches. there is no reason to pray, he doesn't care. there is no reason to worship, he's so omnipotent he doesn't care if you even acknowledge him. but he will be there at the end, and if you're a good person, you're in the VIP section, if not, you go somewhered less pleasant. it is said that "man was made after god's own likeness" to me that doesn't mean we look like god, it means that unlike any other animal on earth, mentally we are like god. in which case, i believe that god is very capable of having a sadistic sense of humor, and both a good and evil streak every now and then.

[woody]

i'm actually truelly curious about this:: does catholicism have any strong views about interracial relationships? or is it just the close-minded people that tend to speak their mind the most that make it seem that way? and if catholicism DOES have anti-interracial views, how does it feel to know you are going to burn in hell for having yellow fever?

does catholicism have any strong views about interracial relationships?
no

or is it just the close-minded people that tend to speak their mind the most that make it seem that way?
yes

[Billy]

I think I share christine's view on religion. I lean more towards atheism but do not rule out the possibility of a supreme being that may have been the catalyst that started life on earth, or at least the advance forms of life on earth. I just feel that "the religious god" is much like santa claus. A story made up to keep people doing what they're suppose to do while no one is watching. A way to teach moral responsibility and a way to control the masses. He knows if you've been naughty or nice, but instead of getting presents or coal, you get heaven or hell. I do think it's kind of ridiculous people can believe in it though, as it's about equally believable as greek mythology. In the entire written history of man kind, there is not one credible, recorded instance of a god. There's mythology like the bible. A collection of stories that may or may not be true. But no real evidence to show one exists.

What I do believe in is reincarnation. I do not belive in things like karma though. I do not believe there is any divine force that provides justice and makes sure the world stays "good". But I do believe it is a type of energy that provides us consciousness coupled with the biological capacity to contain that energy. So when you die, this energy travels through whatever is around it in search of this capacity. I do not know if you can be things like a blood cell or bacteria, but there's no reason to rule that out.

I think all objects in space contain this energy. The universe expands and then contracts. When it contracts, everything in the universe falls towards one another, towards the universe's center of gravity. Everything collides, and during this collision, this energy travels around and shifts, explosions happen and the universe begins expasion again (big bang). And so if your "soul" as we'll call it ends up on an astroid that never sees a life form visit it, it could be billions of years before you have consciousness again, though it won't feel like it. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as if you were to die in space, you won't be stuck in non-existance.

[Trespass]

Flying souls through space?.... sounds good enough to me, now market it and sell it!


I'd say Islam.... sure some people say its a violent religion, but hey its a violent world why would the religion be different. Basically it takes christianity and says that god sent a new prophet to clear shit up that the jews and christians messed up (sounds reasonable to me considering the hack job constantine did by completely changing the christian religion etc.).

Oh and also it shows hell as one would believe a "loving" god would make it... a lack of god's love/presence, not just some random burning punishment thing. A place where one goes to learn from their pride that they were wrong, and they eventually take steps towards finding god, and then its just a progressing journey of enlightenment from there.

But it could all be a explosion of matter that formed a solar system and planet with water which we formed from elements being effected by electrical impulses... im not really the one to say.

OR Zues could really be pissed right now waiting to zapp our ungreatful asses with lightning.

But i think we can all admit that mormons and scientologists have it right!

[The Fanatic]

God is dead

I am a surrealist atheist

Jesus fucked my grandmother

The only god is the one inside your mind, he takes many different forms

Jesus was a hippie

If god did exist, he is not all loving

This post has been edited by Dr. Gonzo: Dec 4 2006, 10:35 AM

[Billy]

Flying souls through space?....

Once again I have proven myself incapable of explaining a thought. So let me try again, but this time in the form of Q&A.

Q: Do you believe souls can fly through space?
A: No. I believe there must be some sort of transporting medium.

Q: What do you think happens when you die?
A: You reincarnate.

Q: Can you reincarnate into anything?
A: I don't think so. I don't think you can reincarnate into non-biological things like rocks. But I also don't think you can reincarnate into things like trees, plants, or someone's kidney. I won't rule these out however, as I do not know what all is involved to have the "biological capacity" to store....you.

Q: So in the past 50 years, we've been sending people up into outter space. What happens if they die out there? Do they magically come back to earth and inherit another body?
A: No. Again, I think there must be some sort of conducting transporting medium for your "soul" to travel through, much like electricity. It doesn't magically go from point A to point B. So let's say one of these astronauts dies on his craft. What I believe is his "soul" travels throughout that spacecraft until it can find a body to inherit. Since, as we know, it will never find one, it will be "stuck" on that craft until that craft crashes into something, like back to earth, or something else that doesn't have life.

Q: What do you mean it travels? Like it walks around and you're a ghost?
A: No. I think you are in the form of something similar to electricity. You are not conscious and your movement is likely pretty random.

Q: So NASA is making plans to send people to Mars for 18 month intervals. Are you telling me that if one of those people die on that planet, which is currently believed to not have any life on it, they will never regain consciousness?
A: Yes and no. While Mars remains Mars, and if it really doesn't have life and never gains life (Earth doesn't colonize it), those people who die there will never inherit a body until the universe contracts, and all matter becomes approximately together for a very short period. At that point, those "souls" may conduct to a part of the total matter that splits off into a planet, which may one day have life. If that happens, they may gain consciousness again. However, if they end up on something that doesn't ever evolve life, like an astroid, they will have to wait another 100 billion or so years before they get another chance.

Q: So you believe the universe is in a perpectual contraction and expasion?
A: Yes. As all matter runs out of kinetic energy, the gravity of everything pulls the universe back together. At some point, all the planets, stars, etc will collide again, causing a brief moment of one giant mass, at which point the elasticity of matter as well as the explosions caused from the collision force this matter to break apart again into the stars, planets, etc. Essentially restarting the universe. I believe this process always happens, and nothing can ever really escape this system.

[The Fanatic]

Truth be told
Reflections in a looking glass

Lifes are sold
Chances at some hot ass

Christians live
Giving you another chance

Truth they give
I’ll never take another glance

Uncertainty reigns
This lonely selfish earth

Uncanny stains
Another worthless human birth

Greedy bastard
Takes everything you earn

Party plastered
Kills all that I have learned

Sin tonight
Regrets the dizzy past

Blinding light
Waking dreams that will not last

Fucking lies
Recited as true fact

Another cries
Forced into a marriage pact

Unhappy days
Until death do we part

Fidelity strays
Away from his lonely heart

Truth is lies
There is no holy book

Everyone dies
Alone inside they look

Christian asshole
Can’t wait till they all die

Eternity he stole
Everything in life a lie

[Trespass]

Once again I have proven myself incapable of explaining a thought. So let me try again, but this time in the form of Q&A.

Q: Do you believe souls can fly through space?
A: No. I believe there must be some sort of transporting medium.

Q: What do you think happens when you die?
A: You reincarnate.

Q: Can you reincarnate into anything?
A: I don't think so. I don't think you can reincarnate into non-biological things like rocks. But I also don't think you can reincarnate into things like trees, plants, or someone's kidney. I won't rule these out however, as I do not know what all is involved to have the "biological capacity" to store....you.

Q: So in the past 50 years, we've been sending people up into outter space. What happens if they die out there? Do they magically come back to earth and inherit another body?
A: No. Again, I think there must be some sort of conducting transporting medium for your "soul" to travel through, much like electricity. It doesn't magically go from point A to point B. So let's say one of these astronauts dies on his craft. What I believe is his "soul" travels throughout that spacecraft until it can find a body to inherit. Since, as we know, it will never find one, it will be "stuck" on that craft until that craft crashes into something, like back to earth, or something else that doesn't have life.

Q: What do you mean it travels? Like it walks around and you're a ghost?
A: No. I think you are in the form of something similar to electricity. You are not conscious and your movement is likely pretty random.

Q: So NASA is making plans to send people to Mars for 18 month intervals. Are you telling me that if one of those people die on that planet, which is currently believed to not have any life on it, they will never regain consciousness?
A: Yes and no. While Mars remains Mars, and if it really doesn't have life and never gains life (Earth doesn't colonize it), those people who die there will never inherit a body until the universe contracts, and all matter becomes approximately together for a very short period. At that point, those "souls" may conduct to a part of the total matter that splits off into a planet, which may one day have life. If that happens, they may gain consciousness again. However, if they end up on something that doesn't ever evolve life, like an astroid, they will have to wait another 100 billion or so years before they get another chance.

Q: So you believe the universe is in a perpectual contraction and expasion?
A: Yes. As all matter runs out of kinetic energy, the gravity of everything pulls the universe back together. At some point, all the planets, stars, etc will collide again, causing a brief moment of one giant mass, at which point the elasticity of matter as well as the explosions caused from the collision force this matter to break apart again into the stars, planets, etc. Essentially restarting the universe. I believe this process always happens, and nothing can ever really escape this system.

All that over a joke, i feel special.

Anyway, so do you think the energy deteriorates over time (like electricity losing power the farther away from the source (life) it goes? Because all energy can do is be expended, energy can't create MORE energy (thus is our understanding of normal science) so that might explain why reincarnation wouldn't be a "re-birth" of sorts, more just an echo of prior self. But would you say eventually the energy would deteroriate at some point as to hold no charge anymore?

Oh and this just reminds me of final fantasy VII with all the "planet force" stuff... heh

[The Fanatic]

Life force


get it right

[Spectatrix]

Alright, everyone out of the life stream!

[Billy]

I believe the universe is in perpetual motion (and the only thing possible to be in perpectual motion) so no, I do not think this energy ever decays. The reason the energy in electricity decays as it travels further from the source is due to resistance in the line it's traveling through (I believe, some EE correct me). The energy that creates our consciousness likely works much different than electricity and resistance through the medium it travels through may not be a problem.

[chook]

I believe the universe is in perpetual motion (and the only thing possible to be in perpectual motion) so no, I do not think this energy ever decays. The reason the energy in electricity decays as it travels further from the source is due to resistance in the line it's traveling through (I believe, some EE correct me). The energy that creates our consciousness likely works much different than electricity and resistance through the medium it travels through may not be a problem.

To be uber correct it would be impedence (real and img) causes it to dissapate, and potential just changes to other forms of energy, but more disorder.

[TetraGrammaton C...]

Billy, you mentioned specific guidelines on your ideas of reincarnation, such as people not reincarnating into plants or inanimate objects. So do you think these things possess a different type of energy in which they too reincarnate? You also seem to say, though not overtly, that one's particular energy is specific and bound. That is your energy remains "yours." I would think that if I believed in this type of reincarnation, that it would be easier to think that we return to one larger energy source, or combine with nearby energy sources when we die. Then, our energies would be split and reconstituted creating an individual with characteristic energies from a mixed bag.
Also, at what point does this energy enter or leave the human body. Does a brain dead person still have it? At what stage of development does a fetus acquire it and where would this offspring get the energy from?

[The Fanatic]

Belief is a creation of the human mind to deal with the uncertainties of a cruel and unjust existence. There is no truth but death, there is no way but life, and the end is certain but where it takes us we will never know. The only certainty with death, is the placement of the body in the ground to be consumed by worms and bugs. Dead men tell no tales, fortune smiles on those who are alive.

[impala454]

as for religious trends, it seems that our generation is having difficulties with Christianity, ranging from "I'm spiritual, not religious" to the casual "Christian" that does not really believe in Jesus, but believes in the Christian god.

well that's where i think a lot of people get mixed up. if you look at the major religions which acknowledge God as the one god as the creator, you pretty much have three. christianity, judaism, and islam. God is essentially the exact same "person" (for lack of a better word) in all three. Jesus is where the difference is. All three acknowledge that Jesus existed, they simply treat him differently. Christians (Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, etc) believe Jesus was/is the son of God, as part of the three part trinity Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (which are all "God"). Jews acknowledge Jesus, however don't believe he was the son of God, they think he was false. Muslims acknowledge Jesus as a great prohpet/teacher, however don't believe he was the son of God. Both Jews and Muslims still believe the "Messiah" has not come yet, while Christians believe he has (Jesus). All three religions acknowledge the old testament of the bible and take it as written history. I'm sure there's other differences people could add here, but it really is surprising how people don't realize how much these major religions have in common.

now of course certain denominations have differences in how they worship... catholics have more traditions, focus on mary a little more, while baptists tend to be a little more contemporary, but they both have the exact same core beliefs.

so if someone claims to be a Christian but doesn't believe in Jesus, they're contradicting themselves.

Personally I believe in the Christian faith and although I haven't been to church in a while, I tend to go to baptist churches.

[The Fanatic]

Islam as a whole does not believe in the messiah. However, one of the branches believes that a descendant of Mohammad will return to lead the faith to new levels (cant remember which branch, but it was the one that split from Islam proper)

[impala454]

I was a fairly religious person until I came out to my youth pastor in high school. He told me if I prayed God would change me... Long story short, I've hardly stepped foot back into a church since.

I'd consider myself a strong atheist now, although I do my best to not try to be one of those bitter church bashing atheists.

i'm not stirring up anything i'm actually just curious. so before this happened you believed in God, but afterwards you didn't? Would you say it was it the youth pastor's fault or more of a general lack of compatibility with your lifestyle?

[The Fanatic]

I used to be a member of the church, as were most good boys and girls who were born in west texas. I was born into the Church Of Christ, one of the most fundamentalist and evil churches in the world. They believe that if you are not baptized in the church of Christ then you are not a Christian. Probably most famous for not allowing instruments in their worship services, the church of Christ was a stepping stone to my disbelief in the Christian god and everything it stood for. This also happened to be the time I discovered alcohol, another vice which was denied by the church even though Jesus turned water into wine, quite a problem for the church eh? All it stands for is hypocrisy and judgment for the unbelieving heathens.

[Trespass]

I used to be a member of the church, as were most good boys and girls who were born in west texas. I was born into the Church Of Christ, one of the most fundamentalist and evil churches in the world. They believe that if you are not baptized in the church of Christ then you are not a Christian. Probably most famous for not allowing instruments in their worship services, the church of Christ was a stepping stone to my disbelief in the Christian god and everything it stood for. This also happened to be the time I discovered alcohol, another vice which was denied by the church even though Jesus turned water into wine, quite a problem for the church eh? All it stands for is hypocrisy and judgment for the unbelieving heathens.

Because they had a belief about baptizing (which most churches hold) and because they are against the VICES you are attached to that makes them evil?

Im not religious by any means, but bad examples...

[jwttu]

Because they had a belief about baptizing (which most churches hold) and because they are against the VICES you are attached to that makes them evil?

Im not religious by any means, but bad examples...

on the baptizing the bible says to the effect of "baptism is just a public display of accepting christ and not required" i know thats badly worded but I think Gonzo's trying to say they are misinterpreting the bible by saying you arent a christian if we dont baptize you because how would they know your heart.

[Trespass]

on the baptizing the bible says to the effect of "baptism is just a public display of accepting christ and not required" i know thats badly worded but I think Gonzo's trying to say they are misinterpreting the bible by saying you arent a christian if we dont baptize you because how would they know your heart.

ha ha ha MIS-interpreting the bible... thats funny.

One can honestly get anything from reading the bible

[Mommy]

I used to be a member of the church, as were most good boys and girls who were born in west texas. I was born into the Church Of Christ, one of the most fundamentalist and evil churches in the world. They believe that if you are not baptized in the church of Christ then you are not a Christian. Probably most famous for not allowing instruments in their worship services, the church of Christ was a stepping stone to my disbelief in the Christian god and everything it stood for. This also happened to be the time I discovered alcohol, another vice which was denied by the church even though Jesus turned water into wine, quite a problem for the church eh? All it stands for is hypocrisy and judgment for the unbelieving heathens.

You think the Church of Christ is bad???? HAHAHAHAHA Buddy, try going to a Baptist church and Baptist school that are both part of the Southern Baptist Convention for your whole life . Hell, go to a Baptist church for one Sunday, then we will talk about which is worse. Ive been to both and I can honestly say that the Baptist church is far more strict.

As for the whole water into wine.... the Bible does not forbid the drinking of wine... it forbids drunkeness. Even in the times of Christ, drunkeness was considered to be a "vice" according to the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible which is the basis of the Jewish religion). Churches often take the stance of being against drinking even a little because some people lack self control. If you drink a glass here and there, they arent going to ban you from church. Hell, they wont really have anything to say at all.

I have no problems with the morals that churches like the church of christ and the baptist church have. What I do have problems with is the whole "perfect god allowing pain and suffering". I might even have my own children attend church until they are old enough to make an intelligent decision to not go. The moral teachings are far better in church then in some shitty public school....which brings me to another point that I would NEVER send my child to a public school. NEVER

This post has been edited by Jessica: Dec 4 2006, 10:52 PM

[griseyeux]

Oh, no doubt no doubt. I agree completly

-dr. gonzo

[impala454]

What I do have problems with is the whole "perfect god allowing pain and suffering".

aw come on now... i took that philosophy world religions class too

the response to that one (if I remember right) was that God put having free will among his creations above making everyone's lives perfect. i also feel that pain & suffering are tests of faith, and that without tests of faith you can't truly believe in something.

[FORSAKENR320]

which brings me to another point that I would NEVER send my child to a public school. NEVER

then your children will be successful upstanding citizens, with no knowledge what so ever of what the "real" world is like. with no idea of how to socially interact with anyone outside their own little closed in bubble. forever condemned to always look down at everyone else as "those" people. they will be people most likely to look at a homeless man and tell him to "get a job you low life" without bothering to think about him as a person. they will think constantly "god.... why cant everyone be like me and get off their ass, i had it hard too, i had to have a part time job for my daddy to buy me that car..." and all the time they will fail to realise that their mother was a slut.
















sorry jessica, just trying to stir up some trouble

[griseyeux]

then your children will be successful upstanding citizens, with no knowledge what so ever of what the "real" world is like. with no idea of how to socially interact with anyone outside their own little closed in bubble. forever condemned to always look down at everyone else as "those" people. they will be people most likely to look at a homeless man and tell him to "get a job you low life" without bothering to think about him as a person. they will think constantly "god.... why cant everyone be like me and get off their ass, i had it hard too, i had to have a part time job for my daddy to buy me that car..." and all the time they will fail to realise that their mother was a slut.
sorry jessica, just trying to stir up some trouble

Actually I disagree... people in private school will still be able to socially interact because they will know people of their ages and interact with them. The problem is when you home school kids. The only problem with kids that go to private school, is that they can be snooty and not really be "with" the popular culture, but that is normally ok they do know how to party. Also, private (and sometimes home schooling) can be better quality education depending on the school/teacher.

-Dr. Gonzo

[Trespass]

Actually I disagree... people in private school will still be able to socially interact because they will know people of their ages and interact with them. The problem is when you home school kids. The only problem with kids that go to private school, is that they can be snooty and not really be "with" the popular culture, but that is normally ok they do know how to party. Also, private (and sometimes home schooling) can be better quality education depending on the school/teacher.

-Dr. Gonzo

This is what happens when you home school kids:

Yeah, sure she can spell good.... ha ha ha

[Spectatrix]

Ahem. Not all homeschoolers are hidden away from their peers.

<-- was homeschooled for 7 years

This post has been edited by Spectatrix: Dec 4 2006, 11:59 PM

[Mommy]

aw come on now... i took that philosophy world religions class too

the response to that one (if I remember right) was that God put having free will among his creations above making everyone's lives perfect. i also feel that pain & suffering are tests of faith, and that without tests of faith you can't truly believe in something.

I understand that whole free will pullshit...but can you honestly have a retort to the fact that free will can still exist without aids, cancer, autism, etc existing? no. I believed in a sovereign God... slowly but surely that all went away, day by day, as I watch my brother whither away into insanity. No amount of philosophical bullshit can argue that point with me. Testing my faith? He tests my faith with an uncurable disease which struck an innocent baby? A perfect God tests my faith with inperfection? I still believe that he exists, but I dont think that he is this infinite loving, all perfect, all knowing god like the Bible portrays. If you want to argue the Bible and philosophy, though, Im down. I know the Bible backwards and forwards, probably moreso than anyone on this site. I can quote off Hebrews 11:1-40 in the King James Version, word for word, but even through all of that, I dont see how he loves people yet curses them to a life of hell.

[Trespass]

Ahem. Not all homeschoolers are hidden away from their peers.

<-- was homeschooled for 7 years

Our 2nd exhibit

[Mommy]

then your children will be successful upstanding citizens, with no knowledge what so ever of what the "real" world is like. with no idea of how to socially interact with anyone outside their own little closed in bubble. forever condemned to always look down at everyone else as "those" people. they will be people most likely to look at a homeless man and tell him to "get a job you low life" without bothering to think about him as a person. they will think constantly "god.... why cant everyone be like me and get off their ass, i had it hard too, i had to have a part time job for my daddy to buy me that car..." and all the time they will fail to realise that their mother was a slut.


















sorry jessica, just trying to stir up some trouble

I had never been to a public school until I came to Tech and I used to go to church 3 or 4 times a week and I dont see how that affected me.

This post has been edited by Jessica: Dec 5 2006, 12:04 AM

[Spectatrix]

Our 2nd exhibit

[Trespass]

I understand that whole free will pullshit...but can you honestly have a retort to the fact that free will can still exist without aids, cancer, autism, etc existing? no. I believed in a sovereign God... slowly but surely that all went away, day by day, as I watch my brother whither away into insanity. No amount of philosophical bullshit can argue that point with me. Testing my faith? He tests my faith with an uncurable disease which struck an innocent baby? A perfect God tests my faith with inperfection? I still believe that he exists, but I dont think that he is this infinite loving, all perfect, all knowing god like the Bible portrays. If you want to argue the Bible and philosophy, though, Im down. I know the Bible backwards and forwards, probably moreso than anyone on this site. I can quote off Hebrews 11:1-40 in the King James Version, word for word, but even through all of that, I dont see how he loves people yet curses them to a life of hell.

Free will isn't just testing people, its setting rules that allow the world to function without intervention. So not that he is "testing" or "cursing them to life of hell", but merely setting a world into motion that he is taken out of ... for free will to occur.

Thats always been my personal view of how god would exist with suffering. Sure he could take away single cell organisms, but he might very well be taking away a rule that can explain our existence without him (if we know trully of a god then can't really be free will because we would know we are wrong)

I've lost two grandmothers to alzheimer's and cancer, as well as a cousin to cancer. Numerous family members and friends have been dealt shitty shitty hands... but I don't blame god (whether there be one or not), its merely our world, ryme or reason aside i can't go through life hating... anyone

[Spectatrix]

Free will isn't just testing people, its setting rules that allow the world to function without intervention. So not that he is "testing" or "cursing them to life of hell", but merely setting a world into motion that he is taken out of ... for free will to occur.

You sound almost like a Deist with this bit.

[Trespass]

You sound almost like a Deist with this bit.

Deism is a religious philosophy and movement that became prominent in England, France, and the United States in the 17th and 18th centuries. Deists typically reject supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and divine revelation prominent in organized religion, along with holy books and revealed religions that assert the existence of such things. Instead, deists hold that correct religious beliefs must be founded on human reason and observed features of the natural world, and that these sources reveal the existence of one God or supreme being.

Hmm.... yeah, maybe...

[Spectatrix]

Trespass, I was referring to this specifically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clockmaker_hypothesis

[GOB]

I had never been to a public school until I came to Tech and I used to go to church 3 or 4 times a week and I dont see how that affected me.

coming from someone who doesn't drink water because it tastes weird

[Jim]

I like Freewill and all. I mean, Jesus sure didn't predict that Judas would betray him and Peter would deny him three times.


Free will with an all knowing, all powerful god, all good god is impossible.

[Trespass]

I like Freewill and all. I mean, Jesus sure didn't predict that Judas would betray him and Peter would deny him three times.
Free will with an all knowing, all powerful god, all good god is impossible.

Matrix: "all you do is give them a choice and 99% will choose what you want them to"

Saying a "god" can't do something is honestly pretty funny to me.

[impala454]

bingo, pretty much he set up the dominos and flicked the first one

[Jim]

bingo, pretty much he set up the dominos and flicked the first one

Right. So god set up a bunch of dominoes and then flicked one and set a path of domino destruction.


It sounds like the dominoes had no choice in what was happening. They were placed without their consent and they couldn't stop the one behind them from hitting them nor could they stop hitting the other one right in front of them. In fact, it was impossible either way.


Domino theory = no free will.



Besides, Jesus straight up tells Peter he will deny him three times and Peter does. Bam, that pretty much sounds like denying someone free will.

[FORSAKENR320]

I had never been to a public school until I came to Tech and I used to go to church 3 or 4 times a week and I dont see how that affected me.

\\ok everyone, i think she just proved my point what private school does to people. lol

[Jim]

\\ok everyone, i think she just proved my point what private school does to people. lol

I think you're theory is 100% Bullshit.


Yes, I know how much the realworld in Plainview, TX affected you. I mean, OMGz it was so hard growing up there and what not.

[FORSAKENR320]

I think you're theory is 100% Bullshit.
Yes, I know how much the realworld in Plainview, TX affected you. I mean, OMGz it was so hard growing up there and what not.

don't you8 have some 14 year old to impress with your uber cool job?

This post has been edited by Spectatrix: Dec 5 2006, 03:08 PM

[TetraGrammaton C...]

Free will in its true sense does not exist, neither does predetermination.
If you want to talk about concepts like free will, you should define them first, so that we are all on common ground.

[The Fanatic]

Free will and predestination can not coexist. The terms are non compatible. It is like mixing bacon and peanut butter (not including brandon), it is just plain sick. In the same way, you can not have an almighty, all knowing god and still maintain free will as a possible route for human salvation.

[Jim]

don't you8 have some 14 year old to impress with your uber cool job?

Oh the pain. Your idea of "real world" are skewed. We all know that you don't get it from High School. Hell, most people don't get it in college. But, whatever.

[The Fanatic]

God is on acid

[chook]

Catholic School all but one year!
#3


I would send my kids to public school, but not in a crappy school district

[Spectatrix]

I went to an Episcopalian school for three years (kindergarten-2nd grade), was homeschooled for seven, then did my junior and senior years of HS at the Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science.

[impala454]

Right. So god set up a bunch of dominoes and then flicked one and set a path of domino destruction.
It sounds like the dominoes had no choice in what was happening. They were placed without their consent and they couldn't stop the one behind them from hitting them nor could they stop hitting the other one right in front of them. In fact, it was impossible either way.
Domino theory = no free will.
Besides, Jesus straight up tells Peter he will deny him three times and Peter does. Bam, that pretty much sounds like denying someone free will.

taking

example

too

literally

[Hartmann]

I have a lot I could write on free will and predetermination but I'll try to keep it short.

By disagreeing with free will you proving that it exists (in a way). You have the ability to disagree, to go your own way, if you didn't, then you would be forced to believe what God wants you to.

God doesn't need you. He doesn't need me. But He wants us.

The only predetermined things that I believe exists are this... 2 things will happen at some point in the future.

1. Christ will return
2. I will die

I am guessing the second will occur first, but I know for a fact, one of those things is certain.


For those looking for good reading about free will and beliefs, read Ecclesiastes. Solomon's account of what life is like when you have everything and still want something more. Considering Solomon was one of the wealthiest kings in all of history he's a pretty good source.

[Jim]

taking

example

too

literally

Right, I took an example you gave me and showed how it did NOT apply to what we were talking about. Too literal or bad example? I'll go with bad example.

[Jim]

Also, I am not saying Free Will doesn't exist. I am saying that Free Will with the Judeo-Christian God doesn't exist.

[chook]

I have a lot I could write on free will and predetermination but I'll try to keep it short.

By disagreeing with free will you proving that it exists (in a way). You have the ability to disagree, to go your own way, if you didn't, then you would be forced to believe what God wants you to.

God doesn't need you. He doesn't need me. But He wants us.

The only predetermined things that I believe exists are this... 2 things will happen at some point in the future.

1. Christ will return
2. I will die

I am guessing the second will occur first, but I know for a fact, one of those things is certain.
For those looking for good reading about free will and beliefs, read Ecclesiastes. Solomon's account of what life is like when you have everything and still want something more. Considering Solomon was one of the wealthiest kings in all of history he's a pretty good source.

you forgot taxes!

and i'll take 3rd world over real world.

[Billy]

I have a lot I could write on free will and predetermination but I'll try to keep it short.

By disagreeing with free will you proving that it exists (in a way). You have the ability to disagree, to go your own way, if you didn't, then you would be forced to believe what God wants you to.

God doesn't need you. He doesn't need me. But He wants us.

The only predetermined things that I believe exists are this... 2 things will happen at some point in the future.

1. Christ will return
2. I will die

I am guessing the second will occur first, but I know for a fact, one of those things is certain.
For those looking for good reading about free will and beliefs, read Ecclesiastes. Solomon's account of what life is like when you have everything and still want something more. Considering Solomon was one of the wealthiest kings in all of history he's a pretty good source.

What if I were programmed to disagree? Or by nature, I don't believe in a god. Is that free will? I don't think so.

In the past, on the subject of free will, I asked the question: Could you go to some random person's house, right now, and kill them? I am 100% sure I can not make that choice. And I am 100% sure you can't make that choice. The answer is always no. You do not have the will to do that, as you are controlled by the fear of repurcussion of doing so, or the natural morality to know not to do it. Though every one of us is capable of doing so, not one here would.

That is not free will. You can argue and argue and argue if you wanted to, you would, yet you can not prove me wrong. You can't go do it. Your "choice" to do so, is dictated by consequence. And the truth is, all of our choices are dictated by consequence. Everything we "choose" is based on some past experience. Completely calculated and exact.

If I were wrong about this, the FBI's method of profiling to find and catch criminals would not be nearly as effective as it is.

[Trespass]

Also, I am not saying Free Will doesn't exist. I am saying that Free Will with the Judeo-Christian God doesn't exist.

Not me, i don't believe in free will now thanks to your brilliance. I mean just this weekend i PREDICTED the cowboys to win over the giants from what i seen taking place with them, and since it happened, thats means they didn't REALLY have free will over it since i predicted it and it happened!!!

[Hartmann]

What if I were programmed to disagree? Or by nature, I don't believe in a god. Is that free will? I don't think so.

In the past, on the subject of free will, I asked the question: Could you go to some random person's house, right now, and kill them? I am 100% sure I can not make that choice. And I am 100% sure you can't make that choice. The answer is always no. You do not have the will to do that, as you are controlled by the fear of repurcussion of doing so, or the natural morality to know not to do it. Though every one of us is capable of doing so, not one here would.

That is not free will. You can argue and argue and argue if you wanted to, you would, yet you can not prove me wrong. You can't go do it. Your "choice" to do so, is dictated by consequence. And the truth is, all of our choices are dictated by consequence. Everything we "choose" is based on some past experience. Completely calculated and exact.

If I were wrong about this, the FBI's method of profiling to find and catch criminals would not be nearly as effective as it is.

In my opinion you are clouding the term "free will" with emotional choices. There are people, who by choice have gone to a random person and killed them. It happened a couple of days ago here. Some people do not care about consequences, so does that mean that they have free will and I do not? hmmm

As far as natural morality goes, I am of the belief that you are born with "broken moral standards". A good example of this is a 2 year old who has never seen his/her parents or other children bite, yet they bite when they're mad. Is that child born with that or is it learned? Most definitely born with it. We have this natural want/desire to do things our way, to be selfish, and that's part of free will.

I am at work so I can't post everything I want. But I'll try to find all of my notes on this subject when I get home.

[Trespass]

What if I were programmed to disagree? Or by nature, I don't believe in a god. Is that free will? I don't think so.

In the past, on the subject of free will, I asked the question: Could you go to some random person's house, right now, and kill them? I am 100% sure I can not make that choice. And I am 100% sure you can't make that choice. The answer is always no. You do not have the will to do that, as you are controlled by the fear of repurcussion of doing so, or the natural morality to know not to do it. Though every one of us is capable of doing so, not one here would.

That is not free will. You can argue and argue and argue if you wanted to, you would, yet you can not prove me wrong. You can't go do it. Your "choice" to do so, is dictated by consequence. And the truth is, all of our choices are dictated by consequence. Everything we "choose" is based on some past experience. Completely calculated and exact.

If I were wrong about this, the FBI's method of profiling to find and catch criminals would not be nearly as effective as it is.

So because one person CHOOSES not to do something because of the reprecussions (when some choose to do it) it means no free will?

That makes less sense than souls in space.

[Billy]

So because one person CHOOSES not to do something because of the reprecussions (when some choose to do it) it means no free will?

That makes less sense than souls in space.

What doesn't make sense?

You have two choices, but you can only choose one. Is that choice?

No. I think people think because they have choice, they have free will. They think they can actually choose, when in reality, the choice they would have chosen, would always be chosen.

If you do not understand, it's not my problem.

[Jim]

Not me, i don't believe in free will now thanks to your brilliance. I mean just this weekend i PREDICTED the cowboys to win over the giants from what i seen taking place with them, and since it happened, thats means they didn't REALLY have free will over it since i predicted it and it happened!!!

There's a difference between predicting the outcome of a given situation and straight up knowing what will or will not happen. Again, Jesus straight up tells Peter he will deny him 3 times. That's not a prediction, that's telling him what will happen.


Prediction != knowing

[Billy]

In my opinion you are clouding the term "free will" with emotional choices. There are people, who by choice have gone to a random person and killed them. It happened a couple of days ago here. Some people do not care about consequences, so does that mean that they have free will and I do not? hmmm

As far as natural morality goes, I am of the belief that you are born with "broken moral standards". A good example of this is a 2 year old who has never seen his/her parents or other children bite, yet they bite when they're mad. Is that child born with that or is it learned? Most definitely born with it. We have this natural want/desire to do things our way, to be selfish, and that's part of free will.

I am at work so I can't post everything I want. But I'll try to find all of my notes on this subject when I get home.

What I am claiming is, that person who did randomly kill someone, couldn't choose to not do so.

And as far instincts go, that's an example of lack of free will. You will naturally make a decision. You do not choose it, you just do it.

What I am claiming is this: If you knew everything about a person, every single bit of material information, you can effectively predict what they will choose.

But just like the concept of a god, this is difficult to prove or disprove. As it's impossible to know everything about a person. But for a tip of the iceberg proof, FBI profilers are able to take information they know about a person's background, and predict where they'll go when trying to run or hide.

[Trespass]

What doesn't make sense?

You have two choices, but you can only choose one. Is that choice?

No. I think people think because they have choice, they have free will. They think they can actually choose, when in reality, the choice they would have chosen, would always be chosen.

If you do not understand, it's not my problem.

ha ha ha, no i understand what you saying... im saying that its stupid. Your telling me BECAUSE i make a choice i didn't make a choice because i only did one of them.... so to you, the only way to have free will is to have a time machine and do both????

nevermind, if you can't see it i most likely can't help lol

[Billy]

ha ha ha, no i understand what you saying... im saying that its stupid. Your telling me BECAUSE i make a choice i didn't make a choice because i only did one of them.... so to you, the only way to have free will is to have a time machine and do both????

nevermind, if you can't see it i most likely can't help lol

Yeah, laugh out of loud and call another concept "stupid" because you don't agree. You get a gold star for best supporting argument.

[Trespass]

There's a difference between predicting the outcome of a given situation and straight up knowing what will or will not happen. Again, Jesus straight up tells Peter he will deny him 3 times. That's not a prediction, that's telling him what will happen.
Prediction != knowing

See... your tryiing to say what it was.. who are you? Bible doesn't say that judas and john couldn't CHOOSE to go the other direction. They still had free will, but don't you think GOD could have all the information going on to make a prediction of what someone will do? Just because he said "you will deny me" doesn't necessarily mean it was a foregone conclusion, it could very well mean that god could look at the nature of john himself and see that in the circumstance he would deny him. We're talking someone with all knowing, don't you think they could make a judgment (Especially if time was of no consequence to them able to see forward and back through time) on something... even if free will IS given?

Your merely arguing the definition of "free will" to me. Since someone can see what someone else will choose before hand to you means there is no free will, i would disagree.

(just a couple of weeks ago i was arguing against gods "free will" and "pre-determination" to a strict baptist... ha ha i'd argue with a ham sandwich)

[Trespass]

Yeah, laugh out of loud and call another concept "stupid" because you don't agree. You get a gold star for best supporting argument.

Sorry, i'll refrain from stating the obvious from now on, sorry peon.

(oh and for the record im not calling your souls as energy thing stupid, i actually like that Point of view)

[Billy]

See... your tryiing to say what it was.. who are you? Bible doesn't say that judas and john couldn't CHOOSE to go the other direction. They still had free will, but don't you think GOD could have all the information going on to make a prediction of what someone will do? Just because he said "you will deny me" doesn't necessarily mean it was a foregone conclusion, it could very well mean that god could look at the nature of john himself and see that in the circumstance he would deny him. We're talking someone with all knowing, don't you think they could make a judgment (Especially if time was of no consequence to them able to see forward and back through time) on something... even if free will IS given?

Your merely arguing the definition of "free will" to me. Since someone can see what someone else will choose before hand to you means there is no free will, i would disagree.

(just a couple of weeks ago i was arguing against gods "free will" and "pre-determination" to a strict baptist... ha ha i'd argue with a ham sandwich)

This argument is exactly why I don't think you "get it". If someone can be predicted, they do not have free will. And that's the problem with the concept of god being all knowing. If he knows what you'll do, obvious, what you were going to do is predetermined. And if that's the case, you cannot have free will (you are incapable of actually making the choice). Why is set of logical statements difficult to comprehend?

I never saw myself defending any of Jim's arguments, but he has you here.

Just a note: I really do not think this thread was started to debate. So we can agree to disagree. Some believe in free will, some do not. That should be the end of it.

[Trespass]

This argument is exactly why I don't think you "get it". If someone can be predicted, they do not have free will. And that's the problem with the concept of god being all knowing. If he knows what you'll do, obvious, what you were going to do is predetermined. And if that's the case, you cannot have free will (you are incapable of actually making the choice). Why is set of logical statements difficult to comprehend?

I never saw myself defending any of Jim's arguments, but he has you here.

Just a note: I really do not think this thread was started to debate. So we can agree to disagree. Some believe in free will, some do not. That should be the end of it.

ha ha, OMGZ PEON DISSAGREZ WIF ME OUZ NOOES!!!

its a forum... started to fuel discussion, so im pretty sure giving opinions is allowed and part of the point of posting...

And i DO "get it" I fully understand what you are saying. I am merely saying that ya'll are DEFINING what something is and isn't. I am merely saying you aren't the defining source of what a god can and can't do for "free will" to exist. I personally don't think i was to jerk off at a point in time to a certain dirty thought (if god could see the future). Have you thought of the idea that perhaps its a mixed bowl? Sure we make our own decisions, but they are made within a rule bound world with limited variables. To you that means its not "free will" i would simply disagree. So YES i am saying we are agreeing do disagree, but why does that mean we can't speak about our views... is peon now the ruling master of what i can and can't say?

And i don't think jim or I are trying to "prove the other wrong" more than just try to punch holes in each others views ... which helps one refine their own beliefs around points made from opposite sides. If you never have an opposite side question your view, how can you ever give your own view credence?

EDIT: Damn it you made me mute pti and miss them talking about mavs!

[Hartmann]

And i DO "get it" I fully understand what you are saying. I am merely saying that ya'll are DEFINING what something is and isn't. I am merely saying you aren't the defining source of what a god can and can't do for "free will" to exist. I personally don't think i was to jerk off at a point in time to a certain dirty thought (if god could see the future). Have you thought of the idea that perhaps its a mixed bowl? Sure we make our own decisions, but they are made within a rule bound world with limited variables. To you that means its not "free will" i would simply disagree. So YES i am saying we are agreeing do disagree, but why does that mean we can't speak about our views... is peon now the ruling master of what i can and can't say?

I think you hit the nail on the head. We are trying to declare the rules we play by and that's not how it works.

[Billy]

Here are a set of statements:

1.) Free will is the ability to make choice given two or more options with the probability of each option being chosen greater than 0.

That is my definition of free will. What this means is if I have to choose between choice A or choice B, and choosing an infinite number of times, I will pick either of these choices atleast once. So in my example question, where I ask could you murder someone. There are two choices: A) Do not murder someone, or B) go murder someone. I would never choose B, and thus, in that situation, I do not have free will. By definition, since the probability of picking A is 100% and picking B is 0%, there is really only one option to pick, and that is A. In this case, I do not meet the definition of having free will. I go on to argue that all decisions are like this, as in you will always have one choice you would pick 100% of them, but you disagree and I'm not going to argue it here.

2.) In order to KNOW exactly what is going to happen, there must be a 100% probability of that event happening.

This is true because if you know something is going to happen, and it does not happen, you really didn't know it was going to happen.

3.) If God knows what you're going to do, you had a 100% probability of doing that.


I know you're intelligent and can put 2 and 2 together. You finish the rest.

[Hartmann]

3.) If God knows what you're going to do, you had a 100% probability of doing that.
I know you're intelligent and can put 2 and 2 together. You finish the rest.

Again, that's based on your "rules" of how it works.

Just because God knows does not mean you cannot change your choice, though He knows you are going to do that. His knowing does not change your ability to have free will.

[Trespass]

Here are a set of statements:

1.) Free will is the ability to make choice given two or more options with the probability of each option being chosen greater than 0.

That is my definition of free will. What this means is if I have to choose between choice A or choice B, and choosing an infinite number of times, I will pick either of these choices atleast once. So in my example question, where I ask could you murder someone. There are two choices: A) Do not murder someone, or go murder someone. I would never choose B, and thus, in that situation, I do not have free will. By definition, since the probability of picking A is 100% and picking B is 0%, there is really only one option to pick, and that is A. In this case, I do not meet the definition of having free will. I go on to argue that all decisions are like this, as in you will always have one choice you would pick 100% of them, but you disagree and I'm not going to argue it here.

2.) In order to KNOW exactly what is going to happen, there must be a 100% probability of that event happening.

This is true because if you know something is going to happen, and it does not happen, you really didn't know it was going to happen.

3.) If God knows what you're going to do, you had a 100% probability of doing that.
I know you're intelligent and can put 2 and 2 together. You finish the rest.

Who are you to say something is 100% certain?....

Why does 100% take away free will? Just because something NEVER happens doesn't make the choice to have it happen suddenly disappear and destroy free will.

And furthermore, you state that because ONE THING has 100% certainty that it destroys ALL free will.

You make so many presumptions which are only YOUR beliefs.

I can appreciate that you think you know everything, and this is SO OBVIOUS and we are just morons or whatever. But you are plainly stating rules where you have no right to make them. And even by your own rules i wouldn't agree that because something is CHOSEN 100% of the time that takes away free will.

[Billy]

[quote]Who are you to say something is 100% certain?.... [/quote]

If I am given the choice between A and A, it is 100% certain I will choose A.

[quote]Why does 100% take away free will?[quote]

Because if free will means the ability to choose, and I am only given one choice, I cannot actually choose. If you cannot choose, you cannot have free will for that decision. You are dictated by the fact that there is only one choice.

[quote]And furthermore, you state that because ONE THING has 100% certainty that it destroys ALL free will. [/quote]

Quote it. Because I didn't say that. Please work on your literacy.

[quote]And even by your own rules i wouldn't agree that because something is CHOSEN 100% of the time that takes away free will.[/quote]

Why not?

[Trespass]

If I am given the choice between A and A, it is 100% certain I will choose A.
Quote it. Because I didn't say that. Please work on your literacy.
Why not?

sigh.....

You are stating you are only given A as a choice because thats all YOU CHOOSE... Which i honestly don't get where you are pulling that from. Im given door A and B, and since SO FAR 100% of the time i choose door A that means door B didn't exist and i NEVER COULD choose it?... god your out of left field and i can't understand why you don't see it.

You state that because of moral reasons of someones choice that takes away thier "free will" does that mean an insane person who does something completely out of his control is the closest person to making "choices"?

And sorry if they didn't teach you how to read into somebodys theories and re-state them... sorry my damn "literacy" getting at me again...

Oh and i answered the why not.... LITERACY OMGZ JEEZUS U STUPIDZ

ha ha

Anyway, i don't have time to beat the dead horse with you anymore.

Did i CHOOSE to hit submit here or was it willed to happen?

Ha ha, i hit preview post!

or did i? so many choices...

but not choices cuz in the future i will have already "chosen"

DAMN IT i can't beat that damn "time" thing taking away my free will

Im gonna make a time machine and choose door B

/end

[TetraGrammaton C...]

Here are a set of statements:

1.) Free will is the ability to make choice given two or more options with the probability of each option being chosen greater than 0.

That is my definition of free will. What this means is if I have to choose between choice A or choice B, and choosing an infinite number of times, I will pick either of these choices atleast once. So in my example question, where I ask could you murder someone. There are two choices: A) Do not murder someone, or go murder someone. I would never choose B, and thus, in that situation, I do not have free will. By definition, since the probability of picking A is 100% and picking B is 0%, there is really only one option to pick, and that is A. In this case, I do not meet the definition of having free will. I go on to argue that all decisions are like this, as in you will always have one choice you would pick 100% of them, but you disagree and I'm not going to argue it here.

2.) In order to KNOW exactly what is going to happen, there must be a 100% probability of that event happening.

This is true because if you know something is going to happen, and it does not happen, you really didn't know it was going to happen.

3.) If God knows what you're going to do, you had a 100% probability of doing that.
I know you're intelligent and can put 2 and 2 together. You finish the rest.

Ok, this is something like what i was asking for, before we go throwing terms around we need some sort of basic definition, that we all agree upon. i would think it more suitable to define free will by stating that it is NOT predestination. i.e. things may be somewhat predictable, because people are predictable, but they have control over it.

i think you are confusing societal conditioning with free will.

you talked about the free will to go kill a person earlier. just because you, or anyone, has concerns about the repercussions of an act does not really make it a consideration of will. that is conditioning. if it were will, then no one would ever do anything that had obvious negative consequences.
another popular argument for free will is the intersection of free wills. applying billy's example, a person's will to kill another person and that second person's will to not be killed.

this often leads to social darwinism.

[Billy]

Thank you Jared for keeping this thread intelligent. I'm done replying to Seth, until he grows up. I will reply to your post shortly.

[Trespass]

Thank you Jared for keeping this thread intelligent. I'm done replying to Seth, until he grows up. I will reply to your post shortly.

hahahahaha



Someone's view challenged, get defensive and cry victim... im cool with that

[Billy]

Ok, this is something like what i was asking for, before we go throwing terms around we need some sort of basic definition, that we all agree upon. i would think it more suitable to define free will by stating that it is NOT predestination. i.e. things may be somewhat predictable, because people are predictable, but they have control over it.

i think you are confusing societal conditioning with free will.

you talked about the free will to go kill a person earlier. just because you, or anyone, has concerns about the repercussions of an act does not really make it a consideration of will. that is conditioning. if it were will, then no one would ever do anything that had obvious negative consequences.
another popular argument for free will is the intersection of free wills. applying billy's example, a person's will to kill another person and that second person's will to not be killed.

this often leads to social darwinism.

Dictionary.com has this to say about free will:

Free will
1. free and independent choice; voluntary decision: You took on the responsibility of your own free will.
2. Philosophy. the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces.

Free and independent choice. So let's start this conversation off with the debate of this definition. I claimed this:

1.) Free will is the ability to make choice given two or more options with the probability of each option being chosen greater than 0.

So what I have done with statement #1 is defined two things. I have defined free will with the ability to make a choice. And I have defined choice as having two or more options to actually choose from. ie. if you only have one option, option A for instance, you cannot choose A, but rather, you must accept A.

Do you agree?

[TetraGrammaton C...]

for now, i will just ask isn't the option of choosing or not choosing in itself another choice. if you fall off a building, there is no choice, you are falling.

if you go to an ice cream place and there is one flavor of ice cream, you can choose not to choose and leave.

i would right something better, but i have to finish this semantics paper.

[The Fanatic]

Free choice is the ability to make a free choice without outside forces determining how a person makes a choice or decides not to choose.

Predestination can be thought of as a set list of people who will be saved and a list of those who will burn in hell for eternity. This list is compiled by god and controlled by his 'divine' will.

These two terms are not compatible. You can not have both. Calvinists traditionally held to the predestination theology, many churches today believe in free choice...

Is God all powerful and all knowing? Can god create a rock that he can not destroy? If the god head is all knowing, then how would free choice be possible? In believing in free choice, a christian is denying the almighty knowledge and divine will of god.

[Billy]

for now, i will just ask isn't the option of choosing or not choosing in itself another choice. if you fall off a building, there is no choice, you are falling.

if you go to an ice cream place and there is one flavor of ice cream, you can choose not to choose and leave.

i would right something better, but i have to finish this semantics paper.

That's exactly what I mean though. The falling off a building is excellent. Because you can't choose to stop falling. You just have to accept you are going to continue to fall until something else stops that fall. You are given the question "Do I continue falling?" and you are only given the option A, "yes". There are no other choices.

There is a 100% probability you will pick A as it is the only answer to pick. Anything that has both "yes" and "no", like in your ice cream example, is an example of choice. There must be atleast two options, to actually have a choice.

So, in conclusion, I am not debating what you just said. I am just applying what you said to my definition, in other words, I think we are saying the same thing; in agreement. Is this acceptable? Are we using the same definition of "choice" ? As in, in order to have choice, the parameter of having atleast two or more options to choose from must exist.

[The Fanatic]

Is God all loving?

[Throwdown]

my only complaint with religion is that it makes people even more weak minded and offended than they already are

then again, so does everything else, so maybe the point is moot

[Trespass]

Free choice is the ability to make a free choice without outside forces determining how a person makes a choice or decides not to choose.

Predestination can be thought of as a set list of people who will be saved and a list of those who will burn in hell for eternity. This list is compiled by god and controlled by his 'divine' will.

These two terms are not compatible. You can not have both. Calvinists traditionally held to the predestination theology, many churches today believe in free choice...

Is God all powerful and all knowing? Can god create a rock that he can not destroy? If the god head is all knowing, then how would free choice be possible? In believing in free choice, a christian is denying the almighty knowledge and divine will of god.

Well you have to believe in the hell that is for all eternity (which isn't true, just made up by the church to scare people into christianity)

also, with pre destination, it might be that you will make your choice, but with a god, it might be able to travel THROUGH space and time meaning it has already been able to see the future and the choice you made. And say there are multiple dimensions for every choice you make then that would mean indefinitely that everyone would most likely make the choice right and wrong in one dimension.

There are so many ways to go off the wall, that we wouldn't find out until we die AND there WAS a god for us to find out. My only point is that i don't think you can logically disprove god, even though i've read some good books that try, mainly because our knowledge of the universe is mostly theoretical at the moment.

[The Fanatic]

God is not all loving, why would he engineer a situation where man would always sin and has to accept an illogical, demented, hypocritical system in order to be saved. I like analogies, they are my friend. Imagine that god is a parent and adam/eve are two children. It is like saying "don't eat any cookies before dinner" then leaving the room unoccupied with the cookies in PLAIN reach. Fuck that shit... God does not exist!

[Trespass]

God is not all loving, why would he engineer a situation where man would always sin and has to accept an illogical, demented, hypocritical system in order to be saved. I like analogies, they are my friend. Imagine that god is a parent and adam/eve are two children. It is like saying "don't eat any cookies before dinner" then leaving the room unoccupied with the cookies in PLAIN reach. Fuck that shit... God does not exist!

Well sounds like you have your own vendetta more than anything, is a god "illogical"... thats up for debate, but analogies can only get you so far. Because if there is a god, his intentions are unknown, and no matter how "unfair" it might appear if he does exist, it still doesn't logically get rid of god.

Anyway, i'll shut up now and go study for my contracts final

[The Fanatic]

It does for me, a fable book is not going to convince me that there is an invisible man in the sky. And yes, I have a vendetta.

[Divergent Realit...]

It does for me, a fable book is not going to convince me that there is an invisible man in the sky. And yes, I have a vendetta.

and why do you have a vendetta?

[Psykopath]

It does for me, a fable book is not going to convince me that there is an invisible man in the sky. And yes, I have a vendetta.

Do you blame the religion of Christianity or the specific Christians that hurt you in some way for this vendetta?

[woody]

http://atheistdelusion.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

[Divergent Realit...]

http://atheistdelusion.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

lets live like its the 14th century?

did i read that right?

wasnt the 14th century one of the shittiest centuries for christendom?

black death, hundred years war started, famine.

those were things that really shook up people's faith in the church.

edit:



hot piss.

ill pass.

[Trespass]

http://atheistdelusion.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

ha ha ha, atheists just got owned!

[Jim]

ROFL ROFL ROFL