24 Mar 06
Originally posted by sonhouseUm, yeah, because before Jesus started talking to his friends the world was happy, joyous, and free. There were no prejudices, no murders, no wars, just people singing Tiptoe Through The Tulips and wearing flowers in their hair.
I hope the purpose of my life is to render christianity and islam toothless, outmoded, to say nothing of moot. The faster those two so-called religions are wiped from the face of the earth, the faster the human race will both grow up and become peacefull. Maybe a pipedream but the world would definitely be a nicer place without the deaths, jihads, crusades, ...[text shortened]... ne percent of what it is now without those two insane relgions ruling large parts of the world.
I'm guessing you'll also want to eliminate nation-states because unless I missed something there have been more wars between nations than between religious groups. But if you can show me how WWI, WWII, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the US Civil War, and the US War of Independence were really one religion trying to eliminate another, I'll believe that your premise is based on logic and fact and not nonsense.
Then you can tell me the difference between the *so-called religions* of Christianity and Islam and *real* religions.
24 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI can't argue with/for/against it because it is unintelligible. You assert that something
That's a shortened version, but you can argue from there, if you like. It won't go very far, but venture if you insist.
was decreed from the beginning of time to happen (no choice) and simultaneously that
that same thing occurred by the product of the choice of an individual.
You are asserting A and ~A -- choice and no choice.
You either fail to understand basic principles of logic or fail to understand precisely what
free will means.
Or both.
I vote for the last.
Nemesio
24 Mar 06
1 edit
the most vile aspect of Christianity are people 'christians/and not' who take over Jesus's role in anothers personal relationship with Him. this is never black or white, but vile all the same when a supposed sheperd gets it wrong.
Jesus said "I am the way the truth and the light. No man comes to the father except through me."
24 Mar 06
2 edits
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWhy don't you answer the question I raised?
Then you are an idiot. There is a reason that newspapers exist and real fortune tellers don't. Figure out why and you might realize the difference between the two cases at hand.
EDIT: What's the difference between the following two propositions:
"P happened at time T"
and
"P will happen at time T with 100% probability"?
EDIT2: How do you know real fortune tellers don't exist? For all you know, your choice of tea or coffee this morning could have been predicted by some seer in India about 300 years ago - making your choice (according to your logic) not-free.
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by NemesioOr he's using a compatibilist notion of free will.
I can't argue with/for/against it because it is unintelligible. You assert that something
was decreed from the beginning of time to happen (no choice) and simultaneously that
that same thing occurred by the product of the choice of an individual.
You are asserting A and ~A -- choice and no choice.
You either fail to understand basic principles of lo ...[text shortened]... l to understand precisely what
free will means.
Or both.
I vote for the last.
Nemesio
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by sonhousei think Christians care more. Christians are out there trying to make a good difference to the world we live in. when you move you make good and bad moves.
One interesting statistic: (or maybe not), 145 replies to the christian most vile and only 54 to the islam most vile. Three to one more argumentative on the christian side. Wonder what that means if anything. Just more christians here?
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by David CThere is a difference between pre-knowledge and decree, decree would imply a lack of free will, knowing the result of a decision only implies the posiblity of information moving backwards in time (or effectively being independant of time which is part of the definition of God.) To my limited knowledge physics does not rule out time travel, but it can result in some complicated paradoxes. To what extent does God interfere with circumstances in order to ensure the desired decisions or if he do all his actions not affect in any way the decisions of every person. For example God performs a miracle knowing full well that it will result in a particular human making a decision that will lead that person to hell. Does God then become responsible for this as he was aware of the consequences of his actions?
uh-huh, gotcha. So, by this definition...and try to follow me here...the action/thought/decision wasn't free. It was...decreed.
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by KaboooombaBut atheist humanists believe this world is our only chance. Christians believe that, ultimately, they are going to a better place.
i think Christians care more. Christians are out there trying to make a good difference to the world we live in. when you move you make good and bad moves.
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by lucifershammerWhat a ridiculous comparison! If I asked the nuclear scientist "Why are you turning that knob", he'd tell me. He wouldn't say (unless he was a snotnose jerk) "Well you're not a nuclear scientist so you can't possibly understand". You really go to absurd lengths in your "arguments".
For the same reason that, unless you understand what he is doing, a nuclear scientist's actions in turning some knobs and pressing some buttons are going to appear "arbitrary and absurd" to you.
24 Mar 06
Originally posted by no1marauderNothing in your "rebuttal" makes the analogy inappropriate.
What a ridiculous comparison! If I asked the nuclear scientist "Why are you turning that knob", he'd tell me. He wouldn't say (unless he was a snotnose jerk) "Well you're not a nuclear scientist so you can't possibly understand". You really go to absurd lengths in your "arguments".