Who is Man to Take Away Free Will???

dbrandt and Simon the Byron,

Great points!

Points?

I love it how people choose to ignore certain facts to make points, and then other people ignore those same facts just so they can agree with the points without question. I think the best "point" made here today is that people follow each other, never questioning who or what they are following. They just do it because they are told too.

Originally posted by Seapeople
Then you are saying that time is one of two things. A spacial dimension, or a man made reference system.

Even if God were to live outside of our time, seeing all things as they happened...all at once.....there is still a problem. There are a lot of contradictions in this statement, but I will explain the most significant as it pertains to this. God would have to exist in an infinite state. Here forever before, here forever after type thing. Time wouldn't exist in this state....and everything would theoretically be simultaneous.

Unfortuneately, there was a definite "time" referred to in the creation story. He created earth....at a point in time. Lets look one step deeper. HE CREATED! If he created, and he knows all, even in his infinite existence, then he knew all about us.......when he created us. It still applies. He created something, and in that instant knew all that was too come. He knows all, and there was a time when there was no universe as we know it...because the BIBLE SAYS HE CREATED. So he made us, all the while knowing us, and knowing our decisions. Thus making them null and void in the end....that is unless you want to believe he knowingly and willingly sent a good portion of us straight to hell. Without any help from us.

First off, time is neither a spacial dimmension nor is it a man made construct. The only thing man-made about time is our particular system of measurement of it. Humans only created the label for time, not time itself.
As for the "everything being simultaneous" part; the only thing that is simultaneous is the events occuring in this universe when viewed from God's perspective. This says nothing about other Universes or other planes of existance.

In regards to creation, he created this Universe in what we would call a certain point in time. I am speaking theoretically in this next sentence. He could have created our Universe and then the rest of what we call time followed it in his creation.

Did he really create us? I will not argue that he created human bodies. I will argue that he did not create souls. I believe that souls can neither be created (even by god) nor destroyed. To give an example, look at cloning. Humans create the body of the new lifeform but he does not give it life. If the body is capable of living it does so. If it is not, it doesn't. Similarly, if the body God creates is able to live, it does so. If it doesn't, it won't. I do not believe that God places a soul in a body. I believe that souls do this on their own.
This means that, in theory, God did not create souls, and therefore does not know everything about us. He only knows what we think and do (which he sees all at once).

He did create this Universe. But the word Universe does not mean Earth. A universe is composed of many galaxies which are composed of many star systems which are composed of many planets. Try seeing it this way for a second: You are writing a computer program to simulate existance (like the Sims but for an entire Universe). If you could write a flawless program on the first try without having to do test runs then when you click "run" the program would run until it causes itself to end. Theoretically, this could be something like what God did (but much more impressive when he did it).

This theory has no known holes in it if you are able to think in a way that is nearly neutral to all previous theories of creation.

Originally posted by Classygirl
You are totally wrong because rapists, child molesters, thieves, etc are threatened with imprisonment/fines, and STILL do it. Common sense shows that there WILL be more deaths of people if it is illegal. You have to mature and understand human nature.

Common sense says without laws against them, there would be more murder, stealing, and rape. That is human nature.

Threat of punishment is a form of behavior modification. Ergo, it modifies behavior.

Also Love + the Word will lower the chances of death, I agree with you there, but you still can't use the government to enforce this.

I believe the Government has the obligation to protect all life. So did Texas back in 1973. But, that concern was not properly addressed.

From Roe vs Wade:
Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.

Whether a Zygote is alive is not a matter for philosophy or theology. It is a matter for science. In particular it is a matter for scientists that specialize in the field-- human embryologists. Today, scientists are very capable of answering the question of whether or not a zygote is alive.

Unfortunately, most people don't seem to care if it is or not, or whether the governement does have an obligation to protect all life.

"Points?

I love it how people choose to ignore certain facts to make points, and then other people ignore those same facts just so they can agree with the points without question. I think the best "point" made here today is that people follow each other, never questioning who or what they are following. They just do it because they are told too."

Yup, they made great points. The points that they have made are what I have been saying, or maybe you didn't read ALL of my posts. You need to check yourself. Who's following who. I am a Christian who KNOWS not to force my beliefs on others, while others try to force their beliefs just because it is the norm. Or better yet, there are those who aren't even Christian but believe that certain rights should be taken away. Who is agreeing without questioning? I am the one who created this thread, and have ALREADY made my points. Those who write what I have been writing make great points because those points are in agreement with what I have been saying. Thank God there are actually people who understand what I am talking about.
I ignored nothing, and have addressed everything that contradicts my beliefs. Maybe you should read all my posts. By your response, I can tell that you didn't read them, or didn't understand them.

Raphael, this is for you:
Just take the time to imagine where some of these women are coming from. Some of these women were raped, and impregnated. Some of these women who were raped and impregnated can't stand the thought of seeing their rapist in the child that she may have. Some of these women fear giving the child up because sooo many children's lives are ruined because of abuse by foster parents. Women like this may make the wrong choice, but it's their wrong choice. Raphael, I have a particular liking for you, and I like how you stand for what you believe in. You're mild tempered, and a real gentleman. You will begin to become more sensitive as you grow. Your heart is definitely in the right place, and if I was harsh with you in any way, please forgive me. I'm just passionate about certain things. It's nothing personal.
I'm not asking you to change your views, I'm just asking that you put yourself in the woman's shoes. When you are able to do this, you will be able to touch the hearts of many women who are wanting an abortion. Do you care to touch their hearts?
Also, don't change. Your temperament is very admirable.
God bless you, and continue to search out His Will for your life.

[Edited on 16-11-2004 by Classygirl]

Originally posted by Classygirl

Yup, they made great points. The points that they have made are what I have been saying, or maybe you didn't read ALL of my posts. You need to check yourself. Who's following who. I am a Christian who KNOWS not to force my beliefs on others, while others try to force their beliefs just because it is the norm. Or better yet, there are those who aren't even Christian but believe that certain rights should be taken away. Who is agreeing without questioning? I am the one who created this thread, and have ALREADY made my points. Those who write what I have been writing make great points because those points are in agreement with what I have been saying. Thank God there are actually people who understand what I am talking about.
I ignored nothing, and have addressed everything that contradicts my beliefs. Maybe you should read all my posts. By your response, I can tell that you didn't read them, or didn't understand them.

You as well as all those who agree with you, choose to ignore facts. You do so because the facts do not support your argument. It is very similar to what liberals do. If you are going to talk to me, and reference the bible, don't just reference things that agree with your point, and ignore the things that do not.

Again, what I said, is that God created. He created us knowing what he was doing. If he did not know what he was doing, then he is NOT OMNIPOTENT. It is as simple as that. If He did know what he was doing, then.....well then he intentionally sent billions of people to hell...without them having a choice. So, if you choose to accept the second possibility, then abort all you want...because when all is said and done it shouldn't matter. That is unless you choose to ignore facts so that your views can meet somewhere in the middle.

Originally posted by Classygirl
Raphael, this is for you:
Just take the time to imagine where some of these women are coming from. Some of these women were raped, and impregnated. Some of these women who were raped and impregnated can't stand the thought of seeing their rapist in the child that she may have. Some of these women fear giving the child up because sooo many children's lives are ruined because of abuse by foster parents. Women like this may make the wrong choice, but it's their wrong choice.

I have considered the woman's point of view. But, I do not agree with the legality of the choice.

If a woman were to give birth and then hold a gun to her baby's head, would you then support her right to choose to pull the trigger? If not, why does you opinion change?

I ask you to consider the life which is lost in an abortion. Put yourself in the place of the zygote. Think of all the things you have done in your life. Think of all the lifes you have touched. Now imagine your mother had an abortion-- all that you are, have been, and will be, gone. All the choices you made in your life-- all your free will-- taken from you.

Again, I remind you there are two lives involved. Not one.

I am glad you made that point. It isn't just the rights of the women we have to consider. What about the rights of the unborn child. Do they have any?

As far as important issues such as abortion, there isn't any other that is as hard to grip. It might be the only issue that everyone can see both sides of. What if a woman was raped? What if the woman would die giving birth? What if the child will be brain damaged beyond reasonable living standards? Retarded? What if, what if, what if? If one of those issues doesn't stump a pro-life person...then they are not thinking for themselves. Being pro-life myself, very strongly pro-life, I have to admit that these are some of the most complicated issues put forth for our conscience these days. I am pro-life 100%, well, that is unless......

This issue is too complicated to be a front runner on a political campaign by the way. Why do we put issues with no clear answers on our political agenda with such high regard? This issue would be best resolved with individual morality. It would be more easily resolved if this society would learn to take responsibility for its actions. If todays society would step up to the plate. It would be better resolved with education into the issue, into sex before marraige. It would be better resolved with parents teaching their children to act like adults. All those other scenerios above...the ones that make you think? Well...if we took steps to correct the problems behind abortion, they would figure themselves out. Parents need to be allowed to discipline. Daddy can't keep bailing out his baby when they get into trouble. Punishment, and consequences must be stiffer for poor judgement.

There is so much behind this issue......people need to think.

Originally posted by Seapeople
I am glad you made that point. It isn't just the rights of the women we have to consider. What about the rights of the unborn child. Do they have any?

Roe vs Wade defined if a pre-birth child is given the constitutional protection afforded to persons under the 14th amendment. The Supreme Court decided a pre-birth human was not a person and had no rights granted to them by the Constitution.

Section IX (A)

...

All this, together with our observation, supra, that throughout the major portion of the 19th century prevailing legal abortion practices were far freer than they are today, persuades us that the word "person," as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn.

...

This conclusion, however, does not of itself fully answer the contentions raised by Texas, and we pass on to other considerations.

...

Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.





[Edited on 17-11-2004 by Raphael_UO]

"You as well as all those who agree with you, choose to ignore facts."

Tell me the facts that I have ignored. In my opinion, you are the one who ignores the facts.

Let's face it, you won't agree with me, and I won't agree with you. Do you want to debate for the sake of debating or are you trying to change my mind?

Free will. Since that is what the thread was started on and seems to have moved away from I will ask this: Is it free will if a deity tells you, "Worship me or be eternally damned to pain and suffering?" Sure you have the choice to worship or not, but if you don't play the way he/she/it wants and worship, you are punished. Big Time. That doesn't seem like free will at all.

Classygirl, your posts seem to say that because someone dissagrees with your opinion they are wrong. This would mean that you are unquestionably correct. The reasons you give for this are simply because you say so. This is a major flaw in logic. For the sake of validating your opinion logically I would like you to give some logical proof that you are right and everyone that agrees with you is wrong?

""Worship me or be eternally damned to pain and suffering?" "

You choose to go to heaven or you choose to go to hell. It's a harsh reality, but it's reality. If you choose not to do your homework for class, you will get a 0. For every CHOICE there is a consequence. Nobody forced you to do your homework, or not to do it, but you chose the 0.

That's the thing, people want to do whatever they want without consequences and that is NOT how the world works, or how it will EVER work.

We have free will, believe it or not. My mind won't change.

"Classygirl, your posts seem to say that because someone dissagrees with your opinion they are wrong. "

So what! The people who are debating me feel that they are correct also. If they didn't, they wouldn't debate me. I am a person with strong beliefs/convictions, and strong passions. I stand, totally, behind what I say. I wouldn't want to debate with anyone who isn't strong in their standings, either. If someone is weak in their beliefs, that is a sad thing. If they didn't stand behind their beliefs, there would be no debates, now would there??

This is life! Have passion and stand behind what you believe. It would be worthless for me to speak if I didn't believe in what I was saying. I didn't come here to make friends and compromise, IT'S THE TRUTH!!! TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT!! In life, you'll learn not to care what others think. You're opinion on me doesn't change who I am, and what I stand for, and I wouldn't want to change your views on me.

This is getting ridiculous. This should be in the rant thread. Boards are for discussion, not brow-beating and pulpit pounding. How can this be "discussion" when individuals won't even acknowledge the others' point of view.:shk:

Originally posted by Classygirl
"Classygirl, your posts seem to say that because someone dissagrees with your opinion they are wrong. "

So what! The people who are debating me feel that they are correct also. If they didn't, they wouldn't debate me. I am a person with strong beliefs/convictions, and strong passions. I stand, totally, behind what I say. I wouldn't want to debate with anyone who isn't strong in their standings, either. If someone is weak in their beliefs, that is a sad thing. If they didn't stand behind their beliefs, there would be no debates, now would there??

This is life! Have passion and stand behind what you believe. It would be worthless for me to speak if I didn't believe in what I was saying. I didn't come here to make friends and compromise, IT'S THE TRUTH!!! TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT!! In life, you'll learn not to care what others think. You're opinion on me doesn't change who I am, and what I stand for, and I wouldn't want to change your views on me.

I am still waiting for some logic that either proves or supports the concept that you are undoubtedly correct and haven't the possibility of being wrong.

In the above post you stated that your opinion is the truth and that we should take it or leave it but you did not state WHY your opinion is the truth ("my opinion is the truth because it is the truth" is not logical support of this belief) or what supports you opinion being the truth and how it does this.

I agree with Katolu. This is a discussion forum and if you are not willing to rationally discuss the topic with other people that may or may not have different opinions than you then this belongs in a rant section rather than the discussion section.

Daniel,

Read ALL of my posts, thoroughly. If you did this, you wouldn't be asking me this question. Honestly, I think that you want me to say that I could be wrong. Who does that?!! Really.

Also, if you are getting a sense that I feel that I am right and everyone else is wrong, that's a good thing! Again, I believe what I stand for and stand for what I believe in. Do you, honestly, think that I would be debating if I felt that I was a tad bit wrong?! People who debate me feel that what they believe is the truth, as well, so I won't back down from my point. I know that you don't debate something without believing that you are right. In all honesty, if you debated without a steadfast stance, you making a worthless point. I have a steadfast point, and no one can change that.

Stop hanging on worthless things. So do you want to debate me on something, or what?

Katolu,

"This is getting ridiculous. This should be in the rant thread. Boards are for discussion, not brow-beating and pulpit pounding. How can this be "discussion" when individuals won't even acknowledge the others' point of view."

That is quite rare. People usually debate. No one acknowledges the other one's point of view. Read the whole thread, I'm sure that even you didn't take into consideration my point on freewill. In reality, people will debate instead of discuss. On both parts (my side and the ones who have debated me) all of us stuck to our guns.

Classygirl,

No one acknowledges the other one's point of view.

If one never acknowledges the another's point of view, one will never understand that point of view. By understanding another's point of view, one learns why they feel the way they do. By understanding another's point of views, one learns to understand the other. If one is not willing to learn to understand one's neighbor, how can one love that neighbor?

"Check your motives. Are they of love, and understanding?"

[Edited on 20-11-2004 by Raphael_UO]