You don't even know your own bible. Jesus never worked on the Sabbath, but
one of his disciples did (I forget which). And if Jesus did work on the Sabbath he should have been put to death as is the law Exodus 31:14.

And Jesus didn't tear down the old laws Mathew 5:17-20.



Quoted for irony.


Yes, actually Jesus did do things on the sabbath...

When the rich young ruler asked Jesus which commandments to obey, Jesus listed many of them, but the Sabbath was not mentioned (see Matt 19:18-19). In fact He had a run-in with many that got angry with Him because His disciples broke the Sabbath on one occasion. That's when Jesus said, "The son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath" (Matt 12:8).

Jesus healed on the Sabbath, and the religious leaders became upset when He did so. Jesus showed their hypocrisy by pointing out that it is good to save men's lives, even if it meant to work to do so. Technically, then, Jesus worked on the Sabbath by healing the sick. Jesus pointed out that even the priests worked on the Sabbath by preaching. David, doesn't your ministers, which preaches that everyone should keep the Sabbath, work on the Sabbath by preaching?

This is exactly the point the religious leaders made the sabbath such a stringent guidline to follow that it was actually more work to follow these rules than to work on the other days, when it is supposed to be a day of rest. They had 39 categories of things you couldn't do on the sabbath, one set for each job description. Jesus showed that this wasn't what God intended it to be as.

They didn't have a choice. Originally they had no knowledge of good/evil so they didn't know it was wrong to eat the fruit. If they didn't know it was wrong then they couldn't choose to disobey.

It was only after they ate the fruit that they knew it was wrong. God set them up to eat the fruit so he could punish them for it.

Why all the drama? Why is God cruel? I don't know, it's your myth.

They had a choice, because God gave them the only commandment of do not eat from the tree. They didn't eat from the tree, until they were tempted by satan (the serpent). I suggest you go back over the account in Genesis again, then we can discuss this further. And no, not from your skepticsannotatedbible website either, just dust off your mom's Bible and read the account for yourself.

this would explain

- the slaughter of thousands of women at the hand of christianity for practicing witchcraft
- the slaughter of millions to date at the hand of war; justified in the name of religion (usually god)
- the slaughter of ??? native americans by the christians who wanted to eradicate them from north america
- the practice of FGM in foreign countries
- the use of devices to "persuade" folks into christianity

http://www.francesfarmersrevenge.com/stuff/archive/torture/devices.htm


i will be damned!!! lewis black's new show "Root of All Evil" on comedy central last night used visuals and talked about the torture devices when describing the catholic church. theme last night: oprah v. the catholic church. HA!!! black determined oprah is far more evil than the catholic church.

i will be damned!!! lewis black's new show "Root of All Evil" on comedy central last night used visuals and talked about the torture devices when describing the catholic church. theme last night: oprah v. the catholic church. HA!!! black determined oprah is far more evil than the catholic church.



good morning! You still hatin on me??? Or can we continue our discourse

good morning! You still hatin on me??? Or can we continue our discourse
yes, it is a good mornin, and thanks - same 2u.

i do not hate ya; i don't hate anyone. that is a vile characteristic and i do not entertain the notion of hate.

no, i do not wish to continue any discourse. creates negativity and i do not go there if i can avoid it.

i do not consider myself any better than u because i choose not to practice religion, jis different. like i said, to each his own.

exercise some free will...my only advice to u.

c ya around tho...

yes, it is a good mornin, and thanks - same 2u.

i do not hate ya; i don't hate anyone. that is a vile characteristic and i do not entertain the notion of hate.

no, i do not wish to continue any discourse. creates negativity and i do not go there if i can avoid it.

i do not consider myself any better than u because i choose not to practice religion, jis different. like i said, to each his own.

exercise some free will...my only advice to u.

c ya around tho...



hatin on... is a term. Doesn't literally mean that you hate me. I'm sure you know this. Just as when you said niggah please... I know you do not mean it as if I'm yo niggah, but that it means to stop. Whether you think you do or not, you are practicing a religion. Your religion is different than mine. Religion was the enemy of Jesus during His days upon earth. The Saducees didn't believe in anything such as miracles, spirits, the resurrection, angels, or demons. Now, if your feelings aren't too hurt, we can continue to talk. Since you think you want to impart some advice to me. First you assume that you know me enough to do such. Second you think you are better off than I am by offering advice to me. I'm only showing your true colors. I think that you should stop running away from the topic you joined when it gets too much for you to handle. By the way, you are the first one I've been overly rude with, probably because of your tone towards me. You think you know it all, that's why you believe you are more right than others. According to you, everyone's choices are right, but yours are more right than everyone elses. That makes you to be a zealot.

They had a choice, because God gave them the only commandment of do not eat from the tree. They didn't eat from the tree, until they were tempted by satan (the serpent). I suggest you go back over the account in Genesis again, then we can discuss this further. And no, not from your skepticsannotatedbible website either, just dust off your mom's Bible and read the account for yourself.

The fact that God is all know means he knew his commandment wouldn't not be heeded making it rather pointless to even give as there was no chance of it preventing them from eating from the tree.

Back to looking at God like a parent. Would a good parent allow their child to do something they told them not to? God was right there the whole time watching them he could've stepped in or something, but I guess the better parental decision is to let your kids go with the bad crowd and do things you deem as wrong so you can punish them later, right?

The fact that God is all know means he knew his commandment wouldn't not be heeded making it rather pointless to even give as there was no chance of it preventing them from eating from the tree.

Back to looking at God like a parent. Would a good parent allow their child to do something they told them not to? God was right there the whole time watching them he could've stepped in or something, but I guess the better parental decision is to let your kids go with the bad crowd and do things you deem as wrong so you can punish them later, right?

no, no, no my friend, you misunderstand... Yes, God foreknew that they would eat of the tree and that satan would fall and that Jesus would be crucified. He also knew that Through Jesus people can make a choice to come to have a relationship with Him and choose to serve God willfully because they love God as God first loved them. Once Christ returns then the new heaven and new earth is made, there will be no more sin and suffering. I am sure you do not believe this part of the story because it hasn't happened yet and in our fallen state we cannot see that kind of thing taking place, but it's as true as everything else in His word to us. Satan is a defeated enemy and is allowed to tempt those that allow him to take them away from God of their own accord. Even Judas who satan entered had the choice not to disobey and betray Christ.

no, no, no my friend, you misunderstand... Yes, God foreknew that they would eat of the tree and that satan would fall and that Jesus would be crucified. He also knew that Through Jesus people can make a choice to come to have a relationship with Him and choose to serve God willfully because they love God as God first loved them. Once Christ returns then the new heaven and new earth is made, there will be no more sin and suffering. I am sure you do not believe this part of the story because it hasn't happened yet and in our fallen state we cannot see that kind of thing taking place, but it's as true as everything else in His word to us. Satan is a defeated enemy and is allowed to tempt those that allow him to take them away from God of their own accord. Even Judas who satan entered had the choice not to disobey and betray Christ.

So you admit him telling Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree was pointless and that if he had wanted to he could've told them something so great they would have never ventured near the tree?

My reasoning is...

1. His commandment didn't work, he knew it wouldn't work yet still said it. Therefor it was pointless.

2. God being omnipotent and omniscient he would know exactly what to say to make them never venture near the tree. Denying this would be denying God's power or infinite knowledge.

So you admit him telling Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree was pointless and that if he had wanted to he could've told them something so great they would have never ventured near the tree?

My reasoning is...

1. His commandment didn't work, he knew it wouldn't work yet still said it. Therefor it was pointless.

2. God being omnipotent and omniscient he would know exactly what to say to make them never venture near the tree. Denying this would be denying God's power or infinite knowledge.

No, Adam and Eve didn't sin for likely 130 years! They didn't go near the tree until they were tempted by the serpent. remember? Satan fell because he wanted to be worshipped like God was by Adam and Eve. Satan made a choice, Eve made a choice, and so did Adam. You make a choice too. You choose to ignore God and be agnostic (whatever that means). Point is we all have a choice. God knows what that choice will be, however we still have the choice to make on our own, remember God is sovereign and man is responsible. We are responsible for what we choose, so we take the punishment for it. God made a way so that we can be free from sin by accepting Christ. Once you accept Christ into your heart you are saved and nothing you do can take you from under that umbrella.

No, Adam and Eve didn't sin for likely 130 years! They didn't go near the tree until they were tempted by the serpent. remember? Satan fell because he wanted to be worshipped like God was by Adam and Eve. Satan made a choice, Eve made a choice, and so did Adam. You make a choice too. You choose to ignore God and be agnostic (whatever that means). Point is we all have a choice. God knows what that choice will be, however we still have the choice to make on our own, remember God is sovereign and man is responsible. We are responsible for what we choose, so we take the punishment for it. God made a way so that we can be free from sin by accepting Christ. Once you accept Christ into your heart you are saved and nothing you do can take you from under that umbrella.

Yes I know the story, the point I'm making is that God didn't even try to stop Adam and Eve from eating from the tree.

Again free will is not something I believe in. I can make a case for how it is impossible for it to exist. So anytime you use the word choice it is a mute point.

Good point once again, I think that Adam and Eve had free will however after that, ultimate free will is no longer. We do have choices. However God will not allow us to be tempted up to more than we can bear, and even then He gives us a way out of that. It's up to us to take it or not.

See, even the Bible states we don't have ultimate free will.

However no one is predestined to perish in Hell. We all have choices to serve God here upon earth.

Good point once again, I think that Adam and Eve had free will however after that, ultimate free will is no longer. We do have choices. However God will not allow us to be tempted up to more than we can bear, and even then He gives us a way out of that. It's up to us to take it or not.

See, even the Bible states we don't have ultimate free will.

However no one is predestined to perish in Hell. We all have choices to serve God here upon earth.

Predestination is what I believe is truth if God exists as I believe that would mean fatalism exists, if God didn't exist it would be determinism.

We aren't predestinated to go to hell. We all have a choice.

No, Adam and Eve didn't sin for likely 130 years! They didn't go near the tree until they were tempted by the serpent. remember? Satan fell because he wanted to be worshipped like God was by Adam and Eve. Satan made a choice, Eve made a choice, and so did Adam. You make a choice too. You choose to ignore God and be agnostic (whatever that means). Point is we all have a choice. God knows what that choice will be, however we still have the choice to make on our own, remember God is sovereign and man is responsible. We are responsible for what we choose, so we take the punishment for it. God made a way so that we can be free from sin by accepting Christ. Once you accept Christ into your heart you are saved and nothing you do can take you from under that umbrella.



Can You show me in the Bible where the serpent is Satan?? Cause i dont see it

We aren't predestinated to go to hell. We all have a choice.

Tell me another way a thought can occur besides being caused by something prior or randomly appearing.

No, Adam and Eve didn't sin for likely 130 years!

Please stick to what's actually in the bible, not your personal unsubstantiated beliefs.

Eve made a choice, and so did Adam.

No they didn't make a choice. Their sin was to disobey god. But they didn't understand that disobeying god was wrong. You can't decide to do something wrong if you don't understand the concept of "wrongness".

Only after they ate the fruit did they magically get the understanding of wrongness.

Please stick to what's actually in the bible, not your personal unsubstantiated beliefs.



No they didn't make a choice. Their sin was to disobey god. But they didn't understand that disobeying god was wrong. You can't decide to do something wrong if you don't understand the concept of "wrongness".

Only after they ate the fruit did they magically get the understanding of wrongness.

Actually it is in the Bible. And they knew it was wrong because God told them not to eat of the tree, lest you shall surely die. That's a fair enough warning.

I would equate it with some kids telling other kids to take a letha hit of heroin, that it's good for you and not poison and that you won't die for doing it. That kid isn't going to go looking for some heroin to take on his own, he had to get coerced into doing it.

Tell me another way a thought can occur besides being caused by something prior or randomly appearing.

You mean by being influenced by something. The Bible states to run from sin. You all have a sin nature, we all sin, and this is a cosmic treason against God. This is why you must have Christ to go before us for our sins.

You mean by being influenced by something. The Bible states to run from sin. You all have a sin nature, we all sin, and this is a cosmic treason against God. This is why you must have Christ to go before us for our sins.

Are you going to dodge every question I have that you don't like?

Are you going to dodge every question I have that you don't like?

Are you going to continue to ask questions of which you won't accept an answer to?

You have a choice, you make the choice to sin against God or not to. In that choice you either condemn yourself or not. We are fallen by sin, this means we cannot save ourselves, but must have Christ to go in our place. You choose to disobey God, in doing so you sin against God.

Are you going to continue to ask questions of which you won't accept an answer to?

You have a choice, you make the choice to sin against God or not to. In that choice you either condemn yourself or not. We are fallen by sin, this means we cannot save ourselves, but must have Christ to go in our place. You choose to disobey God, in doing so you sin against God.

Seriously man if you're gonna keep bringing up free will then we have to debate it a debate which I tried to start 2 posts ago, but you side stepped the question.

I'm also still waiting for an answer on if you think it would be more loving for God to put someone out of existence then have them suffer for an eternity in Hell.

Seriously man if you're gonna keep bringing up free will then we have to debate it a debate which I tried to start 2 posts ago, but you side stepped the question.

I'm also still waiting for an answer on if you think it would be more loving for God to put someone out of existence then have them suffer for an eternity in Hell.

I have heard this question asked before and it's mostly asked by agnostics or people trying to become Christian. You aren't OCD are you?

I think it would be more loving for God to give someone every opportunity all the way up until they die to come to Him, all the while presenting Himself to them in ways only He is able to. If you choose to deny God then that means you do not want to be with God. God won't force you to be with Him for eternity, that would be worse than spending eternity away from God in hell. So no, I do not think it would be better to wipe someone out of existence, for one reason we all have the holy spirit within us. The spirit cannot be destroyed. So it must be separated from His people. Read about Lazarus and the rich man. It will tell you quite alot about hell.

I have heard this question asked before and it's mostly asked by agnostics or people trying to become Christian. You aren't OCD are you?

I think it would be more loving for God to give someone every opportunity all the way up until they die to come to Him, all the while presenting Himself to them in ways only He is able to. If you choose to deny God then that means you do not want to be with God. God won't force you to be with Him for eternity, that would be worse than spending eternity away from God in hell. So no, I do not think it would be better to wipe someone out of existence, for one reason we all have the holy spirit within us. The spirit cannot be destroyed. So it must be separated from His people. Read about Lazarus and the rich man. It will tell you quite alot about hell.

So he could seperate the holy spirit from a person then put them out of existence, that works.

Another question if God knows who will go to Hell why doesn't he not create those people to save them the agony?

EDIT: to answer your first question no I don't have OCD.

Because they all have the choice. God doesn't want anyone to go to hell. His ways are not our ways, and His ways are above our ways. Meaning that we do not know the reason that God does what He does, but what I can understand is that God loves us and allows us all to be born with a purpose, and most of this purpose is to serve and love Him. Even those that go to hell, they have a chance to redeem themselves. No child is born saying they are not believers in God. Only when they grow up and are exposed to things do they back away from God. My children all love God, they have a choice. That choice is there out of love for them.

Because they all have the choice. God doesn't want anyone to go to hell. His ways are not our ways, and His ways are above our ways. Meaning that we do not know the reason that God does what He does, but what I can understand is that God loves us and allows us all to be born with a purpose, and most of this purpose is to serve and love Him. Even those that go to hell, they have a chance to redeem themselves. No child is born saying they are not believers in God. Only when they grow up and are exposed to things do they back away from God. My children all love God, they have a choice. That choice is there out of love for them.

So I'm still waiting for another way possible for a thought to come into existence besides being caused by something prior or randomly occuring.

I don't know. I don't think much, I just type. But seriously, I do not know what you mean. You mean a thought as a sin, since our flesh is in sin, then we are in sin, which encompasses our heart and mind.

I don't know. I don't think much, I just type. But seriously, I do not know what you mean. You mean a thought as a sin, since our flesh is in sin, then we are in sin, which encompasses our heart and mind.

No a thought like "I like pizza" "I should help that lady" "It's a nice day"

those three thoughts come from different influences.

Hunger

service

thankfulness

those three thoughts come from different influences.

Hunger

service

thankfulness

Those are causes now if every thought is caused by something prior or random then our first thoughts were caused by something other than ourselves and since everything stems from our first thoughts then there is no free will.

Also our original mind was not chosen, but given. If it was blank then every action it commited would be random as it would have no basis for any decision made. If it came with traits then the mind would interact with the environment a certain way soley based on those traits.
After this occured every choice after would just be the current mind interacting with the environment. Because if the decision is not caused by the current mind interacting with the environment then it would be random. Since our current mind stems from our orignal mind it is merely just a chain of cause/ random events, nothing more.

Every child is born saying they are not believers in God.

I fixed it for you.

Can You show me in the Bible where the serpent is Satan?? Cause i dont see it
Still waiting on this answer

Still waiting on this answer

No use you'll never get an answer.

what part of MO u live in


Im from Jackson

what part of MO u live in


Im from Jackson

I live over by Springfield not sure where Jackson is.

2 hrs south of STL, by Cape Girardeau

2 hrs south of STL, by Cape Girardeau

Oh ok

Question: Do demons/angels have free will

Question: Do demons/angels have free will

No because they are not their original cause God is.

Question: What is your conception of Free Will

Question: What is your conception of Free Will

Well I see three ways for everything to come into existence either by being caused, randomly appearing, or always existing. Now if you're caused by something previous to be the way you are then you are what that cause made you as yourself(which was formed by the cause) will react to your environment a certain way based on how that cause made you.

When a situation occurs and you make a choice, if you replayed it a million times it would always be the same choice because that is how you reacted to your environment. Now if it was different it would simply mean that a random process made the decison this process would also have to be outside of time itself.

Now God can have free will as no prior cause made him the way he is.

Wouldnt the idea of having a choice mean we atleast had some "free - will" in terms of sinning or not.

THe Bible states that our old self dies when and we become a new creation.

This is a new Soul so to speak. This Soul would have a cause to believe in GOd which is why i believe one cannot lose ones salvation.

However the call to believe is initiated by the Holy Spirit, the choice to accept this call is a choice on the individual. yes the call was before Time and was only out of sovereign Grace, not by something we would have done or did do.

The cause of ones physical existence is created by ones parents, however the cause of a souls existence is by God. I think that the physical existence is one of choices, but the spirtiual follows a predestined course. I dont believe we are robots in the sense that we have no chance to effect our lives. However i also believe that the choice to follow Christ is one humans cannot make on their own. hence why i believe the Holy Spirit initates the call. Because something evil cannot choose something Good.

Wouldnt the idea of having a choice mean we atleast had some "free - will" in terms of sinning or not.

THe Bible states that our old self dies when and we become a new creation.

This is a new Soul so to speak. This Soul would have a cause to believe in GOd which is why i believe one cannot lose ones salvation.

However the call to believe is initiated by the Holy Spirit, the choice to accept this call is a choice on the individual. yes the call was before Time and was only out of sovereign Grace, not by something we would have done or did do.

The cause of ones physical existence is created by ones parents, however the cause of a souls existence is by God. I think that the physical existence is one of choices, but the spirtiual follows a predestined course. I dont believe we are robots in the sense that we have no chance to effect our lives. However i also believe that the choice to follow Christ is one humans cannot make on their own. hence why i believe the Holy Spirit initates the call. Because something evil cannot choose something Good.

Well in my view every choice is really a reaction so no I wouldn't consider a reaction to be free will. Basically current self + choice = decision just like I hit these keys and the letters pop up on my screen it's a built in reaction even though our reaction is constantly changing and not programmed by a higher being IMO.

Suppose i have two types of Soda a coke and a pepsi

I give you the choice to pick one of the two.

You ask for water

Is this a reaction to my question or one of choice

Suppose i have two types of Soda a coke and a pepsi

I give you the choice to pick one of the two.

You ask for water

Is this a reaction to my question or one of choice

It's a reaction to everything. what caused me to want water is myself reacting to environment all the way up until now.

If our original self was given and not chosen can it ever really be ours?

Basically we either come with preprogramming or we are blank. If we're blank then anything we do is random as it's based off nothing if we're preprogrammed then everything we choose is based off that programming. Let's say we're preprogrammed the preprogramming has a set reeaction to our environment wheich then adds to the programming and makes it more complex this process continues throughout your entire life is basically one reaction to another.

These reactions appear to be free but as previously stated they all would be the same if you repeated 100 times unless they were decided by a random process. Since they are all based on our previous selfs eventually you come back to our orignal self which was given by external factors and not chosen.

Well in the "Christian" since we are not really ours we are God's

I guess what im saying is free will is what you are saying is perceived as free will but is what is programmed for me or you to choose.

so do u think racism is a programmed idea?

Well in the "Christian" since we are not really ours we are God's

I guess what im saying is free will is what you are saying is perceived as free will but is what is programmed for me or you to choose.

so do u think racism is a programmed idea?

How is it free will if the choice is a reaction?

How is it programmed for us to choose?

Yes it is. It stems from an original self that reacted to its environment and eventually came to a current self that was racist.

... however the cause of a souls existence is by God.

Could you define what you mean by soul?

If I understand blevunly, our memories, values, beliefs, personality are all in direct response to our environment.

So what is left that is soul?

Could you define what you mean by soul?

If I understand blevunly, our memories, values, beliefs, personality are all in direct response to our environment.

So what is left that is soul?

Here is a piece I wrote a couple years ago. Incase you wanted further reading into my ideas, you do have down the general concept though.

There are two ways of looking at it. Either you believe that souls make decisions or you believe that they don't. If you believe they do then since God created your soul and since he knows all, he would know what exactly it would choose to do as he was making it. Much like a software writer knows what the program they've created will do (they know what it's supposed to do there can be mistakes of course, but an all knowing all powerful supreme being can't make mistakes so think of him as the almighty program writer). If you believe that souls don't make decisions then our environment (anything and everything that has any kind of effect on you ie. people, animals, someone dieing) and our bodies make all of our decisions. The mind only knows basic instincts and what information its environment has bestowed in it. Since we can't pick our environment (if we change it's only because of the effect our environment has already had on us that makes us want to change) or our bodies we are left to only produce the product of their combination. If someone relived their life from day one they would make all the same decisions, because it would be impossible to do any different. Because for every decision there is a reason behind it. If there were no reasons which is impossible then our decisions would all be random and we could not control them so our fates would be decided by a random process nothing more than a roll of the dice or drawing a card from a deck.

Now God can have free will as no prior cause made him the way he is.

According to Christian dogma, God is omniscient. Which means he has no free will at all. Such is the curse of the oracle.

Soul is an imaginary concept,theres no proof that the 'soul' exists.

All, our memories emotions etc r the result of brain chemistry.
When the brain dies all that makes us unique ceases to exist.

According to Christian dogma, God is omniscient. Which means he has no free will at all. Such is the curse of the oracle.

I don't follow. Omniscient means he is all knowing hwo does that stop him from having free will?

Soul is an imaginary concept,theres no proof that the 'soul' exists.

All, our memories emotions etc r the result of brain chemistry.
When the brain dies all that makes us unique ceases to exist.

So you're a materialist?

I don't follow. Omniscient means he is all knowing hwo does that stop him from having free will?

Okay, say tomorrow I can either go to the beach or go to the zoo. Today I don't know which one, but I'll decide tomorrow morning. That's choice.

Now if I was omniscient, I couldn't choose as I would already know that tomorrow I decide on going to the beach. And I'd know exactly what I'm going to do the next day, and the day after that, and the day after that ...

Basically, if you're omniscient your entire existence is already scripted and you just follow the script. You can't break out of the script because you'd already know that you'd do that.

Okay, say tomorrow I can either go to the beach or go to the zoo. Today I don't know which one, but I'll decide tomorrow morning. That's choice.

Now if I was omniscient, I couldn't choose as I would already know that tomorrow I decide on going to the beach. And I'd know exactly what I'm going to do the next day, and the day after that, and the day after that ...

Basically, if you're omniscient your entire existence is already scripted and you just follow the script. You can't break out of the script because you'd already know that you'd do that.

Well he is also omnipresent so there is no God of tomorrow to make decisions. The fact that he knows what he will choose doesn't take away from the fact that he chose it.

So you're a materialist?

no im a realist.
Believing in religous texts doesnt make one 'spiritually enlightened' to anyone but those those inside of their religous bubble.


wasnt it Nietzsche who said that a casual stroll thru lunatic asylums proves that faith in religion means nothing.

no im a realist.
Believing in religous texts doesnt make one 'spiritually enlightened' to anyone but those those inside of their religous bubble.


wasnt it Nietzsche who said that a casual stroll thru lunatic asylums proves that faith in religion means nothing.

Ok, your views just reminded me of a materialist.

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

for anyone who doesn't know what materialism is.

--Determinism--
First cause
Intrinsic to the debate concerning determinism is the issue of first cause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument). Deism, a philosophy articulated in the seventeenth century, holds that the universe has been deterministic since creation, but ascribes the creation to a metaphysical God or first cause outside of the chain of determinism. God may have begun the process, Deism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism) argues, but God has not influenced its evolution. This perspective illustrates a puzzle underlying any conception of determinism:
Assume: All events have causes, and their causes are all prior events. There is no cycle of events such that an event (possibly indirectly) causes itself.
The picture this gives us is that Event A<SUB>N</SUB> is preceded by A<SUB>N-1</SUB>, which is preceded by A<SUB>N-2</SUB>, and so forth.
Under these assumptions, two possibilities seem clear, and both of them question the validity of the original assumptions:
<DL><DD>(1) There is an event A<SUB>0</SUB> prior to which there was no other event that could serve as its cause. <DD>(2) There is no event A<SUB>0</SUB> prior to which there was no other event, which means that we are presented with an infinite series of causally related events, which is itself an event, and yet there is no cause for this infinite series of events. </DD></DL>Under this analysis the original assumption must have something wrong with it. It can be fixed by admitting one exception, a creation event (either the creation of the original event or events, or the creation of the infinite series of events) that is itself not a caused event in the sense of the word "caused" used in the formulation of the original assumption. Some agency, which many systems of thought call God, creates space, time, and the entities found in the universe by means of some process that is analogous to causation but is not causation as we know it. This solution to the original difficulty has led people to question whether there is any reason for there only being one divine quasi-causal act, whether there have not been a number of events that have occurred outside the ordinary sequence of events, events that may be called miracles. The extreme philosophical position in this line of development was held by Leibniz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz), who held in his monistic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism) philosophy that all seemingly causal interactions between two (or more) entities, A ↔ B, are actually interactions mediated by God, A ↔ God ↔ B.

Ok, your views just reminded me of a materialist.

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

for anyone who doesn't know what materialism is.

its funny how religous folk try and label those who dont agree with their beliefs.Its like they're trying to convince themselves of the rigidity that goes along with not believing.
I'm friends with christians,7 day adventists and others.I actually know i'm more free than any religous zealot because i dont need any religous dogma to feel free.

--Determinism--
First cause
Intrinsic to the debate concerning determinism is the issue of first cause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument). Deism, a philosophy articulated in the seventeenth century, holds that the universe has been deterministic since creation, but ascribes the creation to a metaphysical God or first cause outside of the chain of determinism. God may have begun the process, Deism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism) argues, but God has not influenced its evolution. This perspective illustrates a puzzle underlying any conception of determinism:
Assume: All events have causes, and their causes are all prior events. There is no cycle of events such that an event (possibly indirectly) causes itself.
The picture this gives us is that Event A<SUB>N</SUB> is preceded by A<SUB>N-1</SUB>, which is preceded by A<SUB>N-2</SUB>, and so forth.
Under these assumptions, two possibilities seem clear, and both of them question the validity of the original assumptions:
<DL><DD>(1) There is an event A<SUB>0</SUB> prior to which there was no other event that could serve as its cause. <DD>(2) There is no event A<SUB>0</SUB> prior to which there was no other event, which means that we are presented with an infinite series of causally related events, which is itself an event, and yet there is no cause for this infinite series of events. </DD></DL>Under this analysis the original assumption must have something wrong with it. It can be fixed by admitting one exception, a creation event (either the creation of the original event or events, or the creation of the infinite series of events) that is itself not a caused event in the sense of the word "caused" used in the formulation of the original assumption. Some agency, which many systems of thought call God, creates space, time, and the entities found in the universe by means of some process that is analogous to causation but is not causation as we know it. This solution to the original difficulty has led people to question whether there is any reason for there only being one divine quasi-causal act, whether there have not been a number of events that have occurred outside the ordinary sequence of events, events that may be called miracles. The extreme philosophical position in this line of development was held by Leibniz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz), who held in his monistic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism) philosophy that all seemingly causal interactions between two (or more) entities, A ↔ B, are actually interactions mediated by God, A ↔ God ↔ B.

God would be the original cause for everything in this case. As for option 2 a random event would have started the chain of causes.

its funny how religous folk try and label those who dont agree with their beliefs.Its like they're trying to convince themselves of the rigidity that goes along with not believing.
I'm friends with christians,7 day adventists and others.I actually know i'm more free than any religous zealot because i dont need any religous dogma to feel free.

Are you calling me religous? Materialism is merely only believe in matter and denying anything metaphysical like the soul. The mind according to materialism is completely based off chemicals in the brain like you described. Hence why I thought you were a materialist.

Well he is also omnipresent so there is no God of tomorrow to make decisions. The fact that he knows what he will choose doesn't take away from the fact that he chose it.

Omnipresent? Not the Christian God. If he was Omnipresent then he would be in hell, but hell is "separation from God".

Okay, suppose God at one time chose everything he is going to do from that point on. So before that point he had freewill, but after then he doesn't. Given that he is omniscient now, means that now, he doesn't have free will.

Omnipresent? Not the Christian God. If he was Omnipresent then he would be in hell, but hell is "separation from God".

Okay, suppose God at one time chose everything he is going to do from that point on. So before that point he had freewill, but after then he doesn't. Given that he is omniscient now, means that now, he doesn't have free will.

It says in the Bible he is omnipresent I never claimed it made sense.

After that point he would commence in doing what he freely chose IMO.

Yes it is. It stems from an original self that reacted to its environment and eventually came to a current self that was racist.


If you think racism is predestined or any moral issue for that matter then we are now making ethical distinctions

In ur thought process, how then can racism be wrong or any wrong act for that matter.

Omnipresent? Not the Christian God. If he was Omnipresent then he would be in hell, but hell is "separation from God".

Okay, suppose God at one time chose everything he is going to do from that point on. So before that point he had freewill, but after then he doesn't. Given that he is omniscient now, means that now, he doesn't have free will.


For one ur putting God in Time which he is not, so ur whole logic is off and has no bearing

Well I see three ways for everything to come into existence either by being caused, randomly appearing, or always existing. Now if you're caused by something previous to be the way you are then you are what that cause made you as yourself(which was formed by the cause) will react to your environment a certain way based on how that cause made you.

When a situation occurs and you make a choice, if you replayed it a million times it would always be the same choice because that is how you reacted to your environment. Now if it was different it would simply mean that a random process made the decison this process would also have to be outside of time itself.

Now God can have free will as no prior cause made him the way he is.


In the field of Christian theology, these ideas take a more specific form: if there is a God who knows in advance how a human will choose when faced with a choice between good and evil, and this God is ultimately responsible for creating the universe which gives rise to this choice, in what sense does a human have free will, and how can the human be held responsible for a wrong choice? Compatibilism in this context holds that the sovereignty of God and the free will of man are both biblical concepts and, rightly understood, are not mutually exclusive. The all-knowing God (who sees past, present, and future simultaneously from the perspective of eternity) created human beings (who have the subjective reality of making choices in the present that have consequences for themselves and others in the future) in such a way that both are true: God is ultimately sovereign and therefore must have at least permitted any choice that a human could make, but at the same time God is right to hold humans accountable because from their perspective within the confines of serial time, humans make moral choices between good and evil.

Are you calling me religous? Materialism is merely only believe in matter and denying anything metaphysical like the soul. The mind according to materialism is completely based off chemicals in the brain like you described. Hence why I thought you were a materialist.

no.
i've had this convo b4 with others and i suppose u could say that technically i'm agnostic because i dont really know..but then again who does?
I know only from my experiences and exercising objective commonsense that my conclusions r the most accurate i can come up with..it is after all an important subject

no.
i've had this convo b4 with others and i suppose u could say that technically i'm agnostic because i dont really know..but then again who does?
I know only from my experiences and exercising objective commonsense that my conclusions r the most accurate i can come up with..it is after all an important subject

Pascal's Wager - read it and tell me what you think

I believe that these convos just go around and around in circles.
I’ve concluded that’s its wiser to reside myself to the fact that all metaphysical arguments
both for and against the existance of God and the soul are no more than cleverly worded speculation.No one knows for a fact if God exists or not,much less know his nature.
And organised religion is just plain hooey to me partly because of the authorative tone that these so-called truths are presented in.

Man is quite insane. He wouldn't know how to create a maggot, and he creates Gods by the dozen.
- Michel de Montaigne

In the field of Christian theology, these ideas take a more specific form: if there is a God who knows in advance how a human will choose when faced with a choice between good and evil, and this God is ultimately responsible for creating the universe which gives rise to this choice, in what sense does a human have free will, and how can the human be held responsible for a wrong choice? Compatibilism in this context holds that the sovereignty of God and the free will of man are both biblical concepts and, rightly understood, are not mutually exclusive. The all-knowing God (who sees past, present, and future simultaneously from the perspective of eternity) created human beings (who have the subjective reality of making choices in the present that have consequences for themselves and others in the future) in such a way that both are true: God is ultimately sovereign and therefore must have at least permitted any choice that a human could make, but at the same time God is right to hold humans accountable because from their perspective within the confines of serial time, humans make moral choices between good and evil.

Please give references. This isn't your writing (there aren't any spelling errors).

Anyway, if you're talking about Compatibilism, then this definition may help you

From Merriam-Webster:

doublethink, noun, Date: 1949 : a simultaneous belief in two contradictory ideas.

Pascal's Wager - read it and tell me what you think

OMG U R rite!!11 What if Ganesh really exists? I'm going to hurry off now and become Hindu.

Still waiting on this answer

Originally Posted by FLemshady
Can You show me in the Bible where the serpent is Satan?? Cause i dont see it


This is mentioned many times. Starting in Genesis where Satan entered the serpent to tempt eve in the garden. He is referenced from Genesis through to revelation. As the old serpent the dragon... You can merely do a search and find this information for yourself... Google, satan, serpent, bible.

Yes, the serpent in Genesis chapter 3 was Satan. Satan was either appearing as a serpent, possessing the serpent, or deceiving Adam and Eve into believing that it was the serpent who was talking to them. Serpents / snakes do not possess the ability to speak. Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 both describe Satan as a serpent. “He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years” (Revelation 20:2). “The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him” (Revelation 12:9).

While the Bible is not clear as to whether or not the serpent stood up or walked before it the curse, it appears likely that like other reptiles it probably did walk on four legs. That would seem to be the best explanation of Genesis 3:14, "So the LORD God said to the serpent, ‘Because you have done this, cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.’” The fact that the serpent was cursed to crawl on his belly and eat the dust of the earth forever is also a way if indicating that the serpent would be forever despised and looked upon as a vile and despicable creature and an object of scorn and contempt. Why did God curse the serpent when He knew that it was actually Satan who had led Adam and Eve into sin? The fate of the serpent is an illustration. The curse of the serpent will one day be the fate of Satan himself (Revelation 20:10; Ezekiel 28:18-19).

If you think racism is predestined or any moral issue for that matter then we are now making ethical distinctions

In ur thought process, how then can racism be wrong or any wrong act for that matter.

Any act that harms another individual is wrong. Is the person commencing in the act bad? no they are simply doing what everything up until this point has led them too.

Now I'm not racist and I can go and spread the word that racism is wrong this will all be because of how the environment is effecting my current self, but in doing so I will change the environment for others possibly changing their current mind about racism.

In the field of Christian theology, these ideas take a more specific form: if there is a God who knows in advance how a human will choose when faced with a choice between good and evil, and this God is ultimately responsible for creating the universe which gives rise to this choice, in what sense does a human have free will, and how can the human be held responsible for a wrong choice? Compatibilism in this context holds that the sovereignty of God and the free will of man are both biblical concepts and, rightly understood, are not mutually exclusive. The all-knowing God (who sees past, present, and future simultaneously from the perspective of eternity) created human beings (who have the subjective reality of making choices in the present that have consequences for themselves and others in the future) in such a way that both are true: God is ultimately sovereign and therefore must have at least permitted any choice that a human could make, but at the same time God is right to hold humans accountable because from their perspective within the confines of serial time, humans make moral choices between good and evil.


In Compatibilism free will is the ability to not have been forced into a choice. It is not the ability to choose freely. You are still caused into making every choice you ever make. But the fact that no one physically forced you makes it free.

Under Compatibilism if I made a robot and programmed it to hate everything it sees sent it out into the world and it started hating that would be free will. As no one is forcing it to hate it is simply fulfilling it's desires. Now these desires were created by external factors(myself) but they are still desires that are being carried out freely.

Compatibilism agrees more with determinism than free will IMO it even changes the concept of free will because free will is incompatible with reality.

Pascal's Wager - read it and tell me what you think

lancaster is right Pascal's Wager goes for any religion not just Christianity. Using that mentality I'd be taking a shot in the dark to pick the correct religion(if one even exists).

lancaster is right Pascal's Wager goes for any religion not just Christianity. Using that mentality I'd be taking a shot in the dark to pick the correct religion(if one even exists).


Reincarnation is enough to factor that religion out because you would get more than 1 chance if you were wrong.

This leaves the religions that only give one chance such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

Judaism doesnt really have a concept of afterlife other than sheol

So this leaves the choices between islam and christianity

thats why pascals wager is important

Reincarnation is enough to factor that religion out because you would get more than 1 chance if you were wrong.

This leaves the religions that only give one chance such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

Judaism doesnt really have a concept of afterlife other than sheol

So this leaves the choices between islam and christianity

thats why pascals wager is important

And what if some other religion that only two tribesmen over in Africa know about is correct? I think you really need to search out every religion ever to be safe. What if the Christian God only sees a certain sect of Christianity as worshiping him correctly? Also would God allow me into Heaven if I didn't love him and was only worshiping him to avoid Hell?

Originally Posted by FLemshady
Can You show me in the Bible where the serpent is Satan?? Cause i dont see it


This is mentioned many times. Starting in Genesis where Satan entered the serpent to tempt eve in the garden. He is referenced from Genesis through to revelation. As the old serpent the dragon... You can merely do a search and find this information for yourself... Google, satan, serpent, bible.

Yes, the serpent in Genesis chapter 3 was Satan. Satan was either appearing as a serpent, possessing the serpent, or deceiving Adam and Eve into believing that it was the serpent who was talking to them. Serpents / snakes do not possess the ability to speak. Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 both describe Satan as a serpent. “He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years” (Revelation 20:2). “The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him” (Revelation 12:9).

While the Bible is not clear as to whether or not the serpent stood up or walked before it the curse, it appears likely that like other reptiles it probably did walk on four legs. That would seem to be the best explanation of Genesis 3:14, "So the LORD God said to the serpent, ‘Because you have done this, cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.’” The fact that the serpent was cursed to crawl on his belly and eat the dust of the earth forever is also a way if indicating that the serpent would be forever despised and looked upon as a vile and despicable creature and an object of scorn and contempt. Why did God curse the serpent when He knew that it was actually Satan who had led Adam and Eve into sin? The fate of the serpent is
an illustration. The curse of the serpent will one day be the fate of Satan himself (Revelation 20:10; Ezekiel 28:18-19).


THose verses in revelation are talking about a dragon not a snake. The word sin is never used instead this story shows how the maturing of humans into civilized life involved damage of connections established in 2.4-25 between the Lord God, man, woman, and earth.

Snakes were a symbol in the ancient world of wisdom, fertility, and immortality. Only later was the snake in this story seen by interpreters as the devil.

And what if some other religion that only two tribesmen over in Africa know about is correct? I think you really need to search out every religion ever to be safe. What if the Christian God only sees a certain sect of Christianity as worshiping him correctly? Also would God allow me into Heaven if I didn't love him and was only worshiping him to avoid Hell?


Thats between you and God.

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength."

i love reading this thread

Thats between you and God.

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength."

If he wouldn't allow me into Heaven then Pascal's Wager is mute as the only reason I'm a Christian is because I don't want to be wrong, in other words I'm saving my hide.

i didnt say pascals wager was the way to be, all it was intended for was to sway athiests/agnostics

It does have flaws of being very vague all i said was to read it and think about it

i didnt say pascals wager was the way to be, all it was intended for was to sway athiests/agnostics

It does have flaws of being very vague all i said was to read it and think about it

I know you didn't say that I wasn't implying you did. I was just pointing out flaws I noticed in the proposition.

I know it was intended to sway people, but for all the wrong reasons IMO.

/agree

Reincarnation is enough to factor that religion out because you would get more than 1 chance if you were wrong.

This leaves the religions that only give one chance such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

You don't know much about different gods, do you? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Dhu'l-Halasa. Worshippers of these gods don't believe in reincarnation.

You don't know much about different gods, do you? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Dhu'l-Halasa. Worshippers of these gods don't believe in reincarnation.

Good point....:popcorn:

Anywayz, you guys are wearing under my skin. I was hoping to have an intelligent debate, but as far as the ppl in this place, it's pretty much an impossibility.

Seems everyone in here is right, even more right than everyone else is Lancaster... cheers big ears!

Now with that being said. If you WERE to actually read portions of the New Testament at some point in your life, alot of the things you are asking or pondering would easily have been answered. All the things that you view as previous beliefs, were actually all torn down in the NT with Paul being a great Apologist. Tearing down the Gnostics, the greek and roman dieties, and all other dieties, so on and on and on. This is why your belief it shit!

Good show.

Good point....:popcorn:

Anywayz, you guys are wearing under my skin. I was hoping to have an intelligent debate, but as far as the ppl in this place, it's pretty much an impossibility.

Seems everyone in here is right, even more right than everyone else is Lancaster... cheers big ears!

Now with that being said. If you WERE to actually read portions of the New Testament at some point in your life, alot of the things you are asking or pondering would easily have been answered. All the things that you view as previous beliefs, were actually all torn down in the NT with Paul being a great Apologist. Tearing down the Gnostics, the greek and roman dieties, and all other dieties, so on and on and on. This is why your belief it shit!

Good show.

You put absolutely no logic into any of your later posts and now you're insulting people on this board for not being intelligent? You have to be a gimmick.

no just getting fed up with getting attacked by the lot of ya. I'm no Gimmick I assure you. I will regress and do my best to try to answer questions after Resurrection day!

Have a great week!