-->
@zedvictor4
Why not just make perfect humans in the first place.
Excellent question.
Any thoughts on Salixes?
Posts
Total:
83
-->
@zedvictor4
There's no game. We must earn perfection. To have made us perfect in the first place would have made us without having the opportunity to be agents unto ourselves; our free agency would have been thwarted. There is no purpose, and no growth; no challenge in being forced to be perfect.
-->
@secularmerlin
You have to demonstrate anything...
Based upon a flawed syllogism:
Birds fly
Camels walk
Therefore, butterflies swim.
The formula elements must actually add up. You cannot just make up numbers to fit a paradigm and expect they actually are sound logic.
-->
@fauxlaw
I think I see what you are saying. God gives kids pediatric cancer so that the parents are shown that nothing is more important than God. Parents shouldn't care about anything other than praising God ( and sending money to Jim Bakker).
-->
@secularmerlin
WE ARE APES
another flawed syllogistic conclusion?
You might as well also say we are worms. There's less than 3% difference between the two species. That we have a less than 3% difference between us and apes is merely a matter of degree, after all. Thus we see how a king goes a progress through a beggar? Are you just quoting Shakespeare, too? I don't think DNA was Hamlet's point; just that Peloneus was at dinner, and he was the main course.
-->
@FLRW
God gives kids pediatric cancer
The blame God game? We're very good at that, mostly because we misunderstand agency, and will be until, one day, we realizes that God is not the total cause of anything. Thus, agency.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but shyte happens. The challenge is to determine what we will do about it, and thus learn for ourselves, without pontificating syllogisms, the nature of cause and effect. "What would Jesus do?" is the wrong question. We know what he would do. What we don't know is what we will do, facing the mirror and asking ourselves.
Cause is a flawed syllogism that sounds nice, but isn't. The biggest mistake we can make is to assume we have a full understanding of the logic of cause and effect. Not yet, we don't.
-->
@fauxlaw
agency is defined as the capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free choices.
IF you accept this definition and IF you recognize agency in humans by our ability to react to our environment in ways that are clever and adaptive THEN many animals also have agency. Many animals react to their environment in remarkably insightful and adaptable ways. If you recognize our agency based on evidence then you must recognize theirs to as well.
All apes appear to have agency in the same way the human ape does.
IF you are arguing that they have less agency THEN this begs the question HOW ARE YOU MEASURING?
You might as well also say we are worms
In a way we are. Worms are just tubes with an opening at either end. One for taking in nutrients which get digested before waste is ejected from the other. We have the same basic body plan we just have some extra bits.
This is entirely unremarkable and expected since we evolved from worm like creatures that have existed since well before the cambrian explosion.
agency is defined as the capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free choices.
Yes, that is correct, but you ignore the distinction made between man's ability to have agency, and any other creature: consequence. other creatures do make decisions about things, but their innocence does not allow full consideration of the consequences of their actions. We do. Other animals were not given the charge given to Adam with regard to "...every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat." [Gen. 2: 9] The "freely eat" included the tree of knowledge, because even that tree was included in the list of trees, given as "good for food." [Gen 2: 9]. But, there was a consequence given to eating of the tree of knowledge that was unique, even though it was "good for food:" death.
But is death a bad thing? And are other animals aware of its potential? No, but we are, because we can reason consequences, whereby such reason is used to determine consequences, thus allowing agency its full application. It was not that the tree of knowledge was an "evil" tree, and God did tell Adam that he could freely east of it, being one of the trees in the garden "good for food," but the tree of knowledge, unlike the tree of life, carried the consequence of death. I return to the question: is death a bad thing? No; it's merely a temporary end of life. A life that is guaranteed to be revived.
Animals cannot think through all those consequences, and, therefore, do not have agency, even though they make choices. The ability to choose is not all there is to agency. It must include the ability to reason consequences of actions, including the consequences of their own deaths.
-->
@secularmerlin
I will tell you why your assessment that no difference exists between men and all other animals, and therefore, that the distinction between us is the agency of man to act for himself is not shared by the other animals. To do so, I will tell you of a study of an experiment5 conducted with two groups of rabbits of identical breed; a study to determine the affect of an excessively rich diet on one group of rabbits against a control group fed the same mix of ingredients, but without the rich additives. The experiment was to gage the arterial plaque caused by the richness of the study group compared to its relative lack in the control group. Each group of rabbits were cared for by a team of researchers, one team member for each sub-group of rabbits. There were two or three research techs assigned to each sub-group of rich diet and control diet rabbits. As with any experiment, all contributing factors that might alter results were carefully managed, much like using exactly the same measurement technique and tool to measure features of size of a tested item.
So, the examination proceeded, and the results were not as expected. The test assumed that the rich-diet group would all display excessive observation of arterial plaque, and that the control group would have much less, if any. But that is not what occurred. They repeated the test with the same results: 0ne sub-group of the rich-diet specimens not only exhibited no arterial plaque, but were generally healthier than any other sub-group, rich diet, or control group. An exhaustive review revealed the difference: that one rich-diet sub-group was tended by a technician whose care of that group of rabbits was particularly careful and kind. The tech spent more time with the rabbits, held them tenderly, one by one, and, while feeding , and in fact, all the time, spoke softly to them and caressed them lovingly. That added tender care was the only variant; it overcame what should have been the results of all other rabbits in the test group of rich diet. The additional test confirmed this finding.
The difference: love. We all, plant life included, react to love with healthier lives.
What is the greatest commandment? Jesus said to love God with all out heart, mind and strength. The second is like unto it: love our neighbors as ourselves. That is the distinction of the agency of man: to choose to love.
-->
@fauxlaw
My dog seems to love me. My mother seems to love me. The only difference between them is my mother can say "I love you" and even then it is the behavior not the words. I dare say ants fancy other ants.
-->
@secularmerlin
Love is a distressingly bland word in English. It is very non-specific, generalized, and requires added adjectives to give full meaning to what is meant by how it is used. Does your dog express all seven separate lexographic meanings of that word as translated into Greek, for example? No, it does not not.
-->
@fauxlaw
Nope, don't buy it.
How long have we had?....And we're still as imperfect as we ever were.
We've made a mess of the planet and continually fight and argue, and the religiously self righteous are no better in this respect.
Singing hymns on a Sunday, and reading the Bible before bedtime, cannot disguise the imperfections of the righteous.
Sounds like you're wishfully expecting a bright Jehovian future.
The future is bright....The future is techno.
-->
@zedvictor4
When one paints with a singular brush with one dip in the paint, the results are as you suggest. There are both multiple brushes and colors, so, why take one single swipe with one brush? Because you can? And that is supposed to be art? Try harder.
-->
@fauxlaw
What difference do humans have when it comes to ethics compared to other social creatures?
-->
@Reece101
Humans have the unique capacity of control of our behavior by a significant degree of conscious thought of actions and consequences, and our agency to use conscious thought and action than do other creatures driven more by instinct and lack of agency. That other animals may have a degree of agency [such as the fact that a lion that is fully sated is not compelled to kill a lamb], does not imply that their agency is at a level that is man's.
-->
@fauxlaw
Love is a distressingly bland word in English. It is very non-specific, generalized, and requires added adjectives to give full meaning to what is meant by how it is used. Does your dog express all seven separate lexographic meanings of that word as translated into Greek, for example? No, it does not not.
This seems besides the point.
We are getting bogged down in details about my example and leaving the actual conversation behind. It is no different than if I asked "Does your mother express all seven separate lexographic meanings of that word as translated into Greek?", for example.
Please explain exactly why your mother is an independent actor and my dog is not.
-->
@secularmerlin
Your mother typically has the capacity to think through all various thoughts and actions of which she is capable, as well as the consequences of them, because she is given the capacity of reasoning beyond that of the capability of your dog. Man is a unique creation among the the living things on Earth, being in the image of God; meaning more than physical imaging. Shakespeare had it right, through Hamlet: we are the paragon of animals. We are express and admirable. We are, of all animals, apprehensive. "Luminous creatures are we, not his crude matter."
-->
@secularmerlin
Or... you can argue for your limitations. They are entirely of your imagining and construct; they're yours, and you have your agency to cave to them. Be my guest. I'll take another road, thanks.
-->
@fauxlaw
Humans have the unique capacity of control of our behavior by a significant degree of conscious thought of actions and consequences, and our agency to use conscious thought and action than do other creatures driven more by instinct and lack of agency. That other animals may have a degree of agency [such as the fact that a lion that is fully sated is not compelled to kill a lamb], does not imply that their agency is at a level that is man's.
If it just comes down to degree and personal opinion, your point becomes redundant.
Modern day humans are significantly more conscious than Bronze Age and Iron Age peasants, for the most part.
-->
@fauxlaw
Your mother typically has the capacity to think through all various thoughts and actions of
How do you know?
-->
@zedvictor4
-->
@fauxlaw
.
FAUXLAW, the runaway from biblical axioms, and now the #1 Bible fool upon this forum, and the #1 record holder of running away from godly posts, and who has called Jesus a LIAR many times at the expense of committing the Unpardonable Sin,
YOU CONTINUE TO BE IN THE DARK WITH YOUR "AGENCY" FAUX PAS IN POST #36!!! : "The blame God game? We're very good at that, mostly because we misunderstand agency, and will be until, one day, we realizes that God is not the total cause of anything. Thus, agency."
Please tell the membership, why do you continue to go directly against Jesus as the serial killer Yahweh God incarnate with your continued Bible stupidity relative to "Free Agency, Agency, Free Will scenario?" Furthermore, Jesus as God, is the total cause of everything, therefore, do you need another Bible Slapping to prove this point again at your embarrassing expense?
To the membership, DO NOT allow the Bible inept FAUXLAW to pull the wool over your eyes with his Satanic Devil Speak in stating that you have free will, when as shown in my godly inspired post/link below, that you do not! As shown, FAUXLAW has had to runaway from the post below because of his continued stupidity of the scriptures!
.
From the 52nd post of this string, posted 11:17AM on Easter Morning:
To the membership, DO NOT allow the Bible inept FAUXLAW to pull the wool over your eyes with his Satanic Devil Speak in stating that you have free will, when as shown in my godly inspired post/link below, that you do not! As shown, FAUXLAW has had to runaway from the post below because of his continued stupidity of the scriptures!
Note that there is nothing below the 52nd post at the time of its posting, and there is only this post #53...
You have the free will to read, or ignore, and let no one tell you you do not.
-->
@Stephen
@Barney
@PGA2.0
@fauxlaw
.
Stephen,
This is a very prestigious Religion Forum upon the internet, and is growing in its reputation, therefore, do you think that when a pseudo-christian like the Bible inept FAUXLAW continues to spew forth incorrect lying posts relative to Jesus' TRUE WORDS, where the least of which, they should be given warnings not to do so in the future? As in the case of the Bible dumbfounded FAUXLAW that I have had to Biblically correct once again in my post #52 relative to Jesus' inspired true words, we do not have free will, whereas he says through his outright Bible stupidity, that we do have free will, NOT! When FAUXLAW outright calls Jesus a LIAR as shown in said post #52, he is giving this esteemed forum a bad name by directly going against Jesus true words which is BLASPHEME!
Maybe the moderators should add to the Code of Conduct that any pseudo-christian that continues to show Jesus's direct and inspired words as LIES like FAUXLAW continues to do, should be apprehended post haste, and when continually doing this ungodly act, be banned in the name of Jesus, praise!
It is time for this forum to follow Jesus' TRUE WORDS in the passages below regarding FAUXLAW spewing forth LIES regarding the Bible, and others that follow his lying modus operand like ETRNLVW, PGA2.0, ETHANG5, TRADESECRET, et al:
" A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish." (Proverbs 19:9)
“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." (Exodus 20:16)
"Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, but those who act faithfully are his delight." (Proverbs 12:22)
"You destroy those who speak lies; the Lord abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man." (Psalm 5:6)
"A truthful witness saves lives, but one who breathes out lies is deceitful." (Proverbs 14:25)
.
When FAUXLAW outright calls Jesus a LIAR as shown in said post #52
The above from Thomas #54. I remind the membership that post #52, attributed to me by him, is actually Tommy's post. Identity confusion? Wishful thinking? Whatever...
-->
@BrotherDThomas
we do not have free will, whereas he says through his outright Bible stupidity, that we do have free will, NOT!
Well he is wrong as both you and I that know this is an extremely false claim that is never supported , backed-up or proven by those that make this false claim. It is a cop-out for them when they are on the backfoot and have painted themselves into a tight theological corner, Brother.
Indeed, the excuse of "free will" is not even supported by scripture. Quite the opposite, scripture is clear in any language - including Greek - that we do not have free will . And I am sure that I do not have to point out those biblical verses that make it perfectly clear that we, as gods creations and everything we do, everything we say is by the will of god, if the scriptures are to be believed.
I am far too lazy at the moment to put up the verses that prove them all wrong concerning that false claim of "free will", Brother.
-->
@fauxlaw
.
FAUXLAW, the runaway from biblical axioms, and now the #1 Bible fool upon this forum, and the #1 record holder of running away from godly posts, and who has called Jesus a LIAR many times at the expense of committing the Unpardonable Sin,
YOUR COMICAL AND INANE QUOTE IN YOUR POST #53: "Note that there is nothing below the 52nd post at the time of its posting, and there is only this post #53...
You have the free will to read, or ignore, and let no one tell you you do not."
In front of the membership, and barring your abhorred syntactical structured quote above, have you found your "big boy" pants to actually discuss my proposition of you continually RUNNING AWAY from your Bible stupidity in where Jesus says you DO NOT have free will, and where your Satanic position is that you do? Huh?
FAUXLAW, how appropriate would it be on Easter Sunday for you to RUN AWAY again from this challenge of addressing the Bible axiom that Jesus says you do not have free will, therefore making it your soon to be #50 RUN AWAY from biblical axioms from me alone, and not including other members that you have run away from as well!
Whats your lame child like non sequitur EXCUSE going to be this time in not engaging me upon the topic at hand? Huh? LOL!
.
Channeling oromagi:
I don't excuse
I don't accuse
I may recuse
But choose?
Free will I'll never lose:
"Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely..." use.
-->
@Stephen
.
Stephen,
YOUR QUOTE: "I am far too lazy at the moment to put up the verses that prove them all wrong concerning that false claim of "free will", Brother."
The only two of MANY passages supporting the biblical axiom that pseudo-christians DO NOT have free will, whereas the stupefied of the Bible FAUXLAW says that pseudo-christians do have free will, are as follows:
“In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will." (Ephesians 1:11) Key phrase: "having been predestined" and according to the purpose of Jesus and His will, pseudo-christians do not have free will, period!
"The lot is cast into the lap, but it's every decision is from the Lord." (Proverbs 16:33). EVERY decision in what happens to one's life, is determined by Jesus, period!
As I have stated towards the Bible ignorant fool FAUXLAW, he is guilty of the following passage relative to the topic at hand: "Only a simpleton would not know, and only a fool would not understand this:". (Psalm 92:6)
Stephen, what comical run away excuse will FAUXLAW use this time regarding my post #57 above? Time will tell! LOL
.
Obviously it’s a bad idea