Seeing in the Dark SEEDMAGAZINE.COM
Science, science, science. Such worthless crap, let's continue talking about god and love...
Seeing in the Dark SEEDMAGAZINE.COM
Science, science, science. Such worthless crap, let's continue talking about god and love...
This is just my belief and feeling, but I have to have free will so that I can either turn away or come to truly love God out of my own choice, freely, otherwise I would have no real faith and love for God, just forced belief. That is also why I do not like churches that preach all the crazy hell fire and damnation stuff, I think people that are just scared to go to hell are not really having faith in god, but are controlled by fear. (BTW my priest once told me that the true teaching of the catholic church is that hell is a real place, but that they will not declare that one soul is really there because god loves us all and wants us to be at peace and in communion, and at any moment that you express your desire for forgiveness for wrongs and a love and desire to be with god, that you are forgiven and taken into communion with god)
Come now, you say you like the philosophy in here so surely you've read what I've said about free will. If you're choosing to love God based on the state of the stuff around you and the state of what's in your head it's not free will and if you're not then it's not even will.
The thing you're calling free will soils love and faith- if it's not "forced" then you have it thanks to little more than the roll of dice.
What I'm getting at is that it's very easy to say "faith/love is not real without free will" but a lot harder to say what makes them real.
Really the problem I have here is that by saying we need free will to love you're saying that love is just like any other choice and to me choosing who and what you love is a lot like the whole "I don't like hell so I'll worship God" hullabaloo. It's foul and misses the point, but even here I'm saying what love isn't so here's what love is: Something you feel. A sensation. Describing what sensation is like describing what it feels like to taste salt but once you've had a taste of the flavor enough to recognize it it's quite distinguishable.
Loving the person who is holding you hostage is as real as any other love but as a society we've collectively decided that we won't readily allow that particular manipulation so we strip the love from the captive by taking them out of the situation causing it for their own good. I don't know that many of them complain about this after very long so we don't feel guilty about it but that doesn't change the blunt description of what we have done. We don't want love to be that and by enforcing that limit we do to some degree make it something more.
Love is a biological response but we've added to it's meaning by having defined it's purpose. The reality of it's meaning may not be a perfect fit for the definition we've given it but we've at least made it close. Now it is both a choice and not a choice. It sprouts without any consent but unconstrained we have the choice* of nurturing it or stamping it out.
*Not in the sense of free will. I'm using the word more like option here.
Participating in the debate or not I'm not going just let these circular statements pass.
It's possible to do those things without faith you know. Probably also without free will but since that one's more universal you can't show examples of both :/Quote:
It is why as a Christian I do my best to live lead by my love for others, but as you can see I am an INFJ, and if you read my profile that is a defining characteristic of my personality to love and protect others.
It is why it makes me so sad to see such mean things and names called in this thread, intellectual debate is a good, but it hurts me to see people be cruel, even if it is just typed word on a page on the internet, to me it seems so wrong to hurt other people, in any way.
You'll probably need to list off who's hurt whom.Quote:
When people hurt others they can often repulse them and lose so much by driving others away, and in my Christian belief, sense we are all children of God when we hurt others we hurt God as well, we reject love when we hurt other people, when we reject love we reject God who loves us, and wants us to reach that ultimate goal of living through love.
I stepped into this knowing perfectly well that nobody who would ever bring up free will as a reason for anything would accept my arguments that there isn't free will so I'm not hurt by any of this.
The single person I can see having been hurt by anyone in here would be Tlatoani and that would be by shanoxilt in his statements about Mr squirrel's caliber as a person (deserved or not.)
Now clearly I've left out any mention of how my position here harms people but this is because it doesn't. As I said I know they aren't going to accept the position and that leaves one option: fighting it. Perhaps not publicly by posting here but even just rejecting it is a fight within your own head.
What makes that a good thing is that unquestioned faith is a brittle and fragile thing. By fighting to preserve it you temper your faith and make gradual refinements until it's a glorious monument with unwavering foundation.
Were I to present concepts that actually shook someone's faith so hard as to lay it flat like a castle build of playing cards they would go through the horrible experience of shattered faith but instead an argument like this one allows them to actually answer the nigh insurmountable obstacles I have presented here and in time they may actually be able to present answers to these questions beyond "It just magically words because I say God did things that way."
This is all understood, even if only in a very ill defined or subconscious way for some, by everyone who has seen this general topic more than once. Anyone not willing to completely reject the visible reality around them (and thus immune to having their faith shaken in the first place,) can walk away from with what is potentially an endless problem to work on and if they think about it often they should be much better off than someone without that opportunity.
And maybe it is just pop culture but I do believe one has to have free will to have true love, I tried to make my reasoning above, and I do not think it is really a current pop culture thing just seems to me that sense it has been a foundation of the Christian faith from its start, it must have been around for a long time?
Maybe back when I went through teenage depression I'd have thought to myself "this person is an idiot" but in any better frame of mind I know well enough not to think of people like that (though I do style my some of my writing to mislead people into thinking I've implicitly revealed such a thing,) but rather that they are just different. Maybe (well, in the discussion topics I put myself in "mostly" is a more accurate word,) there is a difference in how much experience we have in the topic but instead of thinking that makes me better than someone else my thoughts are aimed at sharing my experience as readily as possible. The real power in doing so from within the framework of debate is that I'm able to prompt people into uncovering ideas that-Quote:
I guess I am just a peace love and joy hippy chick, but that is just me, OHHH and I love you even if you hate me and think I am an idiot :-)
well in the one sense they haven't really thought of it themselves because I lead them to it but in another they did all of the work and I didn't even really point them in the right direction so much as get them interested in looking for it.
*expressing that in the tone I've been using was hard. I can't think of how to write it in any way that's in between those two.
I'm a very calm person (or have just been complimented on controlling my temper so many times I believe the compliments n_n ok not really, things like being heavily disrespected just get the problem solving gears in my head turning, like a most "events" really,) so I'm very accepting of different ideas. It's really no problem to me at all for nearly everything and only when I can't understand how someone thinks could there be any trouble but like I said I'm calm so I don't have any trouble setting those off to the side and resolving to return to them later. I wouldn't have had any hope of re-understanding faith if I'd forced myself to work at it constantly until I got something.
There's really only one thing I won't tolerate: the idea that it's not ok to let other people think/believe differently than you do.
*well, stealing babies from their mothers to make toddler snuff films with and that sort of thing obviously aren't ok either so what I really mean is that there's one idea a sizable group of people hold that I don't tolerate.
Ah- 3rd and 4th junction neurons that were there all along. Makes sense since the visual cortex is basically just a relay station that decides what part of your brain to send, say "dog," to for further mental processing. It makes sense that you'd have to have the spacial stuff before splitting everything up.
Come to think of it hypothetically he should be better at drawing now that he doesn't have the functions that make so many of us bad at it ("I know that box is square and that in squares the lines are parallel" thinking keeps people who haven't been taught to override it from being able to draw such a box at the angles they are actually seeing it from.)
*sigh* People get so heated over religion.
I truly don't understand how anyone can claim to know whether or not (a) supreme being(s) exist(s).
People putting others down for expressing their opinions before making their response in a logical manner, in my opinion is hurtful, and I have seen quite a bit of that, people calling people foul names bothered me too, I have not been looking at the screen names, I don't want to, if I did I would probably lose a large amount of respect for those people and their thoughts, and as I read most of this I am quite impressed by the logic and philosophy, just because I may not approve of one aspect of a person's behavior does not mean I want to chuck every aspect of that person away. It does not make being cruel to others right, or make up for it, but it is the good part of those people.
Your logic and thoughts donít bother me at all, I appreciate the viewpoints and opinions of other people and I think it is great that you express them and I appreciate it, even if I do not agree with something, you know that kind of old saying, I may not like what you have to say, but I will defend to my death your right t say it, and I donít think they are going to shatter my faith, my faith is based in feeling, not logic.
Kudos hugs and stuff to you for being strong and smart :happy:
Sorry to others if I am messing things up sense this is off topic from the thread, but to answer your question, I make my screen small, and I just read the text, that is what I like anyway, over all I think you all are quite intelligent, and that is what I enjoy, seeing hurtful things makes me sad, but knowing we have people that bright thinking about things ina different way from me, in the world makes me very happy, it takes all kinds to make the world go round in my opinion, and I guess I value thinkers, becuase it is a traight I am weak in, I am a person who relies more on intuiton you know :blushed:
Logic ends up being the reason we share our opinions. If it's just "I looked at it and I decided the answer is B" then why you think that was relevant to someone else? They're going to have their own feelings and impressions so sharing your opinion like that just makes a thread into, well, basically a voting booth where you don't have any reason to read what other people have said; you can only care about the end tally.
With logic, ratio, and reasoning you're saying "hey, here's how I solved the puzzle, you can use it too if you like," and suddenly that's something very useful to other people.
Now, like I said we don't usually just look at something and then let logic blindly lead us to one idea or another. You have to aim in a direction to get anywhere. Even the people going to huge efforts to be unbiased aim their logic. What they get at the end is "If it's A then I should see this and this but if it's B I should see this instead," and then they let whichever of those they see determine which option they side with.
So really you could do this too. You've got the intuition and feeling telling you there's free will and a God and love. A loving God that made us all knows from the start that we don't all think the same way so if everyone is to have a fair chance at finding love and free will and anything important there should be multiple ways to get to them. You got there by feeling and intuition but now that you are there you should be able to look back to where you started and spot other paths that lead to the same place.
That's really all we're doing (with the little details omitted.)
"It is the things for which there is no evidence that are believed with passion. Nobody feels any passion about the multiplication table or about the existence of Cape Horn, because these matters are not doubtful. But in matters of theology or political theory, where a rational man will hold that at best there is a slight balance of probability on one side or the other, people argue with passion and support their opinions by physical slavery imposed by armies and mental slavery imposed by schools."
Mostly people just sharpshoot so you've got people on one side of the fence arguing against the god of young earth creationist and people on the other side of the fence arguing against anarchy. We're usually not really fighting against what the other group stands for.
Personally what I don't get is why everyone is so eager to think you're arguing against them, especially when the first response to what people describe is "I'm not like that!"