The Results are in...There is a God! - What now?

Because, in the context of gift-giving, the recipient has no accountability to the donor. I gave examples of use and non-use.The child who didn't use the toy put only a monetary value on it. He would have been just as happy with the cash. He didn't appreciate the effort that was put into choosing a gift for him. He didn't appreciate the pleasure that the donor would get from watching him play with it.In a sense, a gift is a two-way street. That's why Jesus said, "It is more blessed to give than to receive." And they are wrong to do so. You're abusing the analogy.Baby Lala would be punished for hurting her sister. The toy is completely incidental.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Did the servants in the parable share and squander their money? No, they increased it. Tell me Ringo's story where it is a paraphrase of the Parable, tell me how the first child bartered his toy for something even better, and then ask who is more 'correct'.

I'll start with a simple one. If I cheat on my wife, she divorces me and I have to pay alimony. An "additional penalty" would be swimming in a lake of fire. Where on earth did you get that idea?If my free will is supposed to be a "gift", I want the giver to get the @#$% off my back and let me use it as I see fit. As far as I can tell, He seems to be cool with that. It's only those who don't understand what a "gift" is that seem to have a problem.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

In the context of all 3 of the current examples, the recipient does have accountability.The receiver of the talents had accountability.
Children have accountability.
We have accountability, if not to God, at least to the state.If you would like to bring in an example of non-accountability gifting, you may. I must have read an abreviated version of that story. I never heard about the child's lack of appreciation et al. But actually I detect a little flip-flopping here. Isn't using the gift in the way the donor wants it to be used 'accountability'? And in your story, you never said the parents wanted to watch the child use the toy. I was the one who brought up the desires of the parents in the first place. Hey, this is your analogy here. In it toy=free will. I think baby Lala didn't use her toy appropriately.

The talents were in no way to be construed as a "gift", so the example is irrelevant.You have not shown that children are "accountable" to their parents in their use of gifts.Our accountability to the state is irrelevant in the context of "gifts".If you would like to bring in an example of accountability gifting, you may. Of course not. Accounting is much more precise than that. Every gift has an "intended" use. Toys are intended to be played with. Free will is intended to be exercised.If the recipient doesn't play with the toy, he might as well have been given stocks and bonds. If the recipient doesn't exercise his free will, he might as well have been given handcuffs.My point being that the only "wrong" use of a toy is to not play with it. The only "wrong" use of free will is to surrender. So you did get the point, even if you pretend not to. The desire of the parents is that the child have fun (and possibly learn something on the side). Their desire is not that the child play with the toy in a prescribed way. That would take most of the fun out of watching.By analogy, God's desire would be for us to "have fun" in the exercise of our free will - i.e. to learn to produce good consequences instead of bad ones. By analogy, His desire would not be to tell us what to do in every instance. That would take most of the fun out of watching us. Strictly speaking, baby Lala is your analogy, not mine. Literal-minded people have such trouble with analogies, don't they?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Ringo, I will return to a step-by-step debate if need be, but I will make an attempt to sum up your position which you may affirm or deny.Would you say that receiving a gift gives us the right to use it in which ever way we chose?Would you say that if we are allowed to chose between good and evil, there should be no consequences for whichever choice we make?

Yes. There should be no additional consequences beyond the natural consequences.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This is what it comes down to. In my opinion the natural consequence is damnation, in whatever way you define it.It may be a lake of fire, it may be a permanent dissipation of your spirit, it may be, as I see it, the eternal pain of seperation from God.In your opinion the natural consequences have nothing to do with the spirit, but maybe more with the old 'an eye for an eye' rule. Before I sound rude, I will explain. There is a certain amount of authority which we are able to exercise to bring a criminal to justice. If a man who commits crime is imprisoned it can be said that he got what he deserved. The problem is, did he repent? Did the natural consequence of his action change him?Or let's look at you alimony example. It is not a great one I must say. If a man cheats on his wife, there may be NO consequence. He may never get caught. If he is caught and divorce is the consequence, he may be happy. If he gets divorced and pays alimony, he may be so wealthy it doesn't matter, and alimony is never guaranteed. Even with all of the above, he is likely to get married again and repeat the 'punishment'. Besides, does alimony repair emotional damage done to wife or children?Since divorce is not a crime, apply the same thoughts to a serial killer.I would only like you to determine what the natural consequences are for a serial killer who is never caught? You may say 'guilt' but he may not feel guilty.The natural consequence of any evil action may be quite pleasant to the evil-doer. Lying, stealing, cheating or killing may be extremely convenient if you don't get caught. Unless you are on the receiving end, that is.The gift of choice between good and evil is just that. It does not render the evil 'good'. It does not grant immunity to those persistant in evil. That is unnatural and not even granted by law. But, on the bright side, it does, and God does, give us some room to make mistakes.Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

No, but God in His wisdom may know that you will soon be forced to make a decision in your free will and not ride the wishy washy wave forever!

I'll assume this is not a joke. I first thought that it was.The quote fails under 'Unaffirmability' as a test for truth.
As with all cntradictions, it denies it's own source of power and amputates it's own legs.Richard has his way with words- with words he likes to play. His words are few- just like his thoughts- those brain cells thinking Poo!Truth (God) is the source of His own power, and is never divided against Himself. Divided kingdoms and divided thoughts, cannot stand.Poor Richard.
Edited by scottness, : No reason given.

---

If we will not learn to eat the only food that the universe grows ” the only food that any possible universe ever can grow ” then we must starve eternally. (Lewis- The Problem of Pain)

There is nothing "natural" about damnation.

quote:

---

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

---

There's a reason why Paul made a distinction between wages and gift. The gift can not produce death, only life.Wages are one side of a contract. In our social contract, we stipulate punishmnet for crime. But a gift is not a contract - it's a one-way street.I don't know why it's so hard for some to understand: if there are strings attached, it is not a gift.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

You were right the first time.

quote:

---

The world is a tragedy to those who feel, a comedy to those who think.

​

- Horace Walpole

---

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Sorry, I don't know what you're trying to say there. Don't know what you're trying to say there either. Not at all. The falls are the natural consequence of the decision to ski. What we're talking about here is an additional punishment after the natural consequences. It would be like falling down all day while learning to ski and then being thrown into jail for being a lousy skier. That's what I'm saying God would not do. Don't know what that's supposed to mean either. I'm talking about taking responsibility for your own actions. What's "wishy washy" about that?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Archer writes:First instincts and hope usually precede doubt. Then we doubt those feelings by thinking, and then fear of the puzzle overshadows the joy of incomplete discovery. So which wins in the end? thoughts or feeling?We need both which is why we have both. We don't discover, by elimination of resources, we discover by finding how they cohere. And when they converge, we can see much more clearly. And that does not mean I have practiced such or mastered it as often as I should. I am a fool learning not to be,very slowly. They are not things that we can master. They are things we choose to let master us, or not. At first intuition, or after the doubt of thought and the ensuing despair? Cynical humor and it's manifest laughter, is a feeling created by somewhat conflicted thoughts. It is an attempt to hide the confusion by denying it. Of being faced with the paradoxes and irony, and realizing we do not know the way.Our only other choice is to get on our knees. Obviously, I reccomend the latter.As you can see, thinking is not usually comical. It is objective, and has the objective of discovering truth, so that your joy will be complete.Edited by scottness, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Unconflicted "thoughts" aren't really thoughts - they're just opinions.

​

- Ringo

---

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC