Free will vs Omniscience

I wouldn't necessarily say that. I'd say that jar's viewpoint has helped me to express mine more clearly. So why don't you have any argument against it, other than that you don't like it? I think He was a fictional character, probably based on an amalgamation of itinerant preachers, much like Elmer Gantry. It's obviously figurative. "The word became flesh" ought to be a clue to that. It would be hard to tell everything the author(s) meant by it without a thorough study - and I haven't done that. It seems safe to say though that Jesus wasn't literally a word. Yes.Incidentally, is "secular common sense" different from any other kind of common sense? There's no easy answer to that. It would require a line-by-line study and I don't feel much inclined to do that. It might be more productive for you to try to understand whether the doctrines you have been spoon-fed make any sense. Those commentators have an axe to grind. I don't. But I couldn't care less what you accept. I'd rather have you figure it out for yourself. If there was a God, we wouldn't have to replace Him. As it is, he isn't feeding the hungry, etc. so we have no choice but to do it ourselves. Where's the ambiguity?

On the one hand you have a point in that humans make this stuff up. On the other hand, GOD if GOD exists created us long before we even had the imagination to make Him up. I am arguing that GOD may exist in reality. You may bray about lack of evidence, but I am claiming (again) that evidence is an unnecessary precondition of this argument.You have to give the concept of Belief more credit. And to that, I would argue that no solid case as been made falsifying the belief. I would also again ask why you keep grinding this axe that you claim not to be grinding. Is it simply to hone your clever argumentative skills? (I will admit that that reason is part of my motive) Agreed. What you need to do is to consider belief as a viable option. You claim not to need evidence against the idea. What is frustrating is that you took the trademark---one message among many---and threw out other messages plus the whole point of the stories in general...which is Christ. Or are you going to challenge the assumption that Jesus Christ is the central message of the NT? Oh, and I almost forgot...I am posting in another topic right now...so let's get back to our discussion here. (sorry! )Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

No. I really don't. As I said, we don't need negative evidence. All we need is lack of positive evidence. I have no axe to grind. Almost everybody I know is religious. My life would be a lot easier if I believed the nonsense that you believe. No. I don't. No, Christ is not the point. The message is the point. And you're the one who throws out the parts of the message that you don't like. Of course I am. The messenger is not the message. The map is not the territory.

So in the Book Of Ringo, what is the central message of the NT? Can what is written support your assertion...apart from your beloved Matthew 25?Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Out of curiosity, do you ever argue(or discuss these things) with them? Or do you all talk about other things and live peacefully side by side? Also...do you respect any of them for what they do apart from their religion? Would you honestly think they would be better off without the religion? Why or why not?

quote:

---

Matthew 22:37-40 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

---

Old Testament too. See above. The question is: Why is Matthew 25 so behated by you?

No. They probably would call themselves "fundamentalists" but they're not as crazy as American fundamentalists. They're not very different from me, except that they talk matter-of-factly about Jesus being real - and I try not to laugh too overtly. Hard to say.

I don't hate Matthew 25...I just find it simplistic that jar, in particular, can talk of a Bible with a "God" that humans created...a Serpent that told the truth and was a plot device, and yet wax poetic about Matthew 25 as the central message to be hung on the wall. If anything, I'm jealous. Matthew 25 is a great message...though I don't see the Goats as being Christians nor do I see the message suggesting global inclusivism.I get angry that he preaches the bible this way...of focusing on us as the prime responsibility and somehow able to make it without the very messenger which told us the message. But I'll admit that you defended your point quite well. The two commandments summarize the whole enchilada.

You don't want to see Christians as goats. You don't want to give up your exclusive get-out-of-hell-free club.

It is certainly wrong to lump them all into one category. Goats will come from all varieties of people...even those who obey the message and live their lives on their own terms. I don't believe that if hell exists it was created for people. It was allowed to exist as a place for free-willed angels who didn't want to live under House Rules.What many don't understand is that life in Heaven, as many believe it to be, would not in any way be boring or restrictive. Granted you would have to learn that you couldn't smoke inside. I would say to those stubborn free willed spirits that they would be better off listening rather than clinging to their independence.I could argue that you want a right to be left alone and get to smoke in your own house should you want to. That's a bad thing.

Why?

Because smoking shortens your life. You can forever argue that you have a right to live your life the way you want...even as you urge me to follow the message...but you can't argue that smoking is good for some and not others.

Smoking might shorten my life. A lot of things might shorten my life. Why should somebody else get to pick and choose which ones I can do?

Did you ever listen to your Father when you lived under his roof, or did you do what you wanted even back then?

Like most children, I got away with as much as I could.