|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Morality without god | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
No, according to the story God changed his mind. How many actual swords did Jesus bring to his disciples, one each or several? Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Pharoah made his own decisions, but it is contributed to God because asked him to choose. You really haven't ever read the Bible have you even when others have included the comments from God in their posts. The Bible says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. God di not ask him to choose, God changed his choice.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
You really haven't ever read the Bible have you even when others have included the comments from God in their posts. The Bible says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. God di not ask him to choose, God changed his choice. Since Dr A didnt answer the question, Ill ask you. How many actual swords did Jesus give to his disciples, one each or several? Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
How many actual swords did Jesus bring to his disciples, one each or several? None that I know of. You should try reading the Bible, it's really interesting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
None that I know of. You should try reading the Bible, it's really interesting. But doesnt the Bible say, Jesus say "I have not come to bring peace but a sword" So shouldnt we believe jesus brought swords to people? "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." matthew 10:34 Thats in the bible right? Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
You really haven't ever read the Bible have you even when others have included the comments from God in their posts. The Bible says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. God di not ask him to choose, God changed his choice. In the same context it says that Pharoah hardened his own Heart. So which is it, he did it or God did it, or both "But this time also Pharaoh hardened his heart and would not let the people go." Exodus 8:32 thats in the Bible right? Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
But doesnt the Bible say, Jesus say "I have not come to bring peace but a sword" So shouldnt we believe jesus brought swords to people? No. Is there anything else really obvious you need helping with?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Looks like you're the one who needs a lesson in reality. The meaning of terms is dictated by human consensus. Which means that you don't get to invent your own meaning and pass it off as reality.
quote: Even if you have, you haven't given any reason to consider it free will if that process is under the control of another or even if coercion is applied.
quote: You mean that you can show a case where Pharaoh agreed to let the Israelites go even when God had "hardened his heart?" to make him do otherwise ? Then go on.
quote: Nobody is claiming that Pharaoh lacked free will when God's influence was NOT applied to control his decision (except, maybe, for those people who hold that God giving evidence of his existence would violate our free will). So your "example" is merely proof of your inability to think logically.
quote: Then I guess that I'm debating and you aren't
quote: On the contrary, I say that it is a metaphor. Obviously God did not literally make Pharoah's physical heart, physically harder. If you wish to claim that the metaphor has another meaning it is for you to supply a meaning that makes sense in context. As anybody can see, you have not done so.
quote: Being an arrogant and boastful twit does not permit you to dictate definitions. As you have demonstrated you are far from being logical or a "skilled thinker". Definitions are a matter of consensus, and therefore actual usage in real life overrides your personal opinions, no matter how much you try to glorify them.
quote: No, I'm not going to abandon my point just because you can't rationally argue against it.
quote: So by your "logic" the ability to freely make choices in the absence of mental alterations etc. would "prove" the ability to freely make choices even when mental alterations had been made to force a particular outcome ? That IS the situation we are discussing. Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Jesus did not give any swords to any of his disciples.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If you read the Exodus fable you will find that it is written like a Saturday Matinee serial and so there are a continuing series of events not simply one event.
The fact is that in the story it is both, Pharaoh hardens his own heart but the god character in the story also directly controls the Pharaoh and directly hardens his heart. The god character in the myth uses persuasion, intimidation, coercion and direct mind control.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Well, what do you think it means that "the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart"? Sounds to me like the Lord changed the Pharaoh's mind for him. It is metaphorical in its content. What makes you think it is metaphorical? Seriously, I know your position in this debate requires it, but what is it from the actual story that suggests that this is a metaphor? Because if I acutally read it, it doesn't come off as a metaphor at all. Check it out: Take a look at Exodus 10:
quote: God is basically saying that he's showing off. After the locusts, the Pharaoh's pretty much done:
quote: The Pharaoh was convinced by this plague, it could have all been over. But instead:
quote: The Lord hardened the Pharaoh's heart so that the Pharaoh wou not let his people go so that the Lord could deal harshly with the Egyptians so that Moses could tell his children and grandchildren all about it so that they would know he was the Lord.
Pharoah made his own decisions, but it is contributed to God because asked him to choose. Pharoah made his own choice The Pharoah admitted that he had sinned and was done with the whole plague thing. But that wouldn't have made an awesome enough story for the Lord. So instead, the Lord changed the Pharaoh's mind so that the Lord could keep on with the plagues and make himself look like a badass. You know, for bragging rights... for the children. That's how the story reads. What in the story suggests that hardening his heart is a metaphor rather than being an interference with the Pharaoh's free will? And don't just repeat yourself about the Pharaoh making his own decision. Follow your own advice about addressing an argument in a debate. Show us something from the story that supports your position.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dawn Bertot writes:
You're redefining the word for your own purposes. What's supposedly "free" has a lot of conditions attached. We have "free will" but if we make the wrong choice, we get punished. A choice between apple pie and a punch in the face isn't a free choice; it's a loaded one.
ringo writes:
Maybe you could elaborate on this a bit and show how it actual applies to this discussion. You're using the word "free" like an advertising man: "Here's a FREE gift for you... but you have to buy our product to get it."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
The Pharoah admitted that he had sinned and was done with the whole plague thing. But that wouldn't have made an awesome enough story for the Lord. So instead, the Lord changed the Pharaoh's mind so that the Lord could keep on with the plagues and make himself look like a badass. You know, for bragging rights... for the children. That's how the story reads. What in the story suggests that hardening his heart is a metaphor rather than being an interference with the Pharaoh's free will? And don't just repeat yourself about the Pharaoh making his own decision. Follow your own advice about addressing an argument in a debate. Show us something from the story that supports your position. Not a problem. Is it logically possible that God was trying to Show off or demonstrate a point, sure. But how much sense does it make to give someone free will, then pull it away at the last moment? If God is actually God, he could have simply freed the children by miracle, then performed miracles, exclusively in the wilderness. But there is always two sides to every story correct? So from a rational standpoint, given the WHOLE context, it is more reasonable to assume that Gods actions through patience and longsuffering, only served to harden his heart further. Yes it was Gods intention to demonstrate that he was not only God over Pharoah, but the false Gods of the Egyptians. So his purpose was not to show off, but unseat long held misconceptions about the beliefs the children had come to accept. Everything he is doing is for them, not him. So the purpose of the plauges was not to show off, but deliver them from false Gods and false IDEAS. I am sure had pharoah early agreed, to let the people go God would have had no further need to inflict the plauges. But since Pharoah insisted that he and the Gods of the Nile were more powerful, God was willing to help the children to see otherwise There is no showing off here, just education, patience, longsuffering. To assume God needs to show off for any reason is nonsensical at best. To assume that an all powerful God needs to show off, doesnt seem like the most logical approach. So one would quickly abandon such a silly proposition, correct? If I am ever in a situation where my children need my physical attributes to protect them, it should be obvious that my goal is to use those abilites to PROTECT them, not to say to the opposing party, LOOK WHAT I CAN DO. Its called the majority of the story. Look very closely at these passages Exodus, 7:4, 13, 14, 16, and 22. Exodus 8:9-10, 15, 19, 25, 28, 32. Exodus 9:2, 7, 12, 17, 21, 27, 34-35. 10:3-4, 10, 11, 16, 17, 20 24. Exodus 11:1, 9. 12:31-32. !4:5 Yes while there are two likely possibilites, which seems more reasonable, eh? Hows that for starters, Catholic scientist? Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
You're redefining the word for your own purposes. What's supposedly "free" has a lot of conditions attached. We have "free will" but if we make the wrong choice, we get punished. A choice between apple pie and a punch in the face isn't a free choice; it's a loaded one. Let see if we can identify your simple mistake. Wrong choice or right choice, have nothing directly to do with the decisiom making process. The punishment that flows from what you call a wrong decision or right decision, has nothing to do with the decision making (free will) process. Now watch, pay very close attention. It is not logically possible for ME to redefine free will at all. It is what it is from a reality standpoint. My definitions have nothing to do with what Gravity is or is not. It is not possile to interfer with someones free will and for them to actually posses it at the same time. That is a logical contradiction Logically there can be NO conditions, as you suggest, to the free will process, since nothing but mental (biological) alterations, could affect the actual process. Which would mean free will no longer exists, which would make it a mute point as to wheather thier free will was being influenced. Simply put, I could not redefine free will any more than I could redifine the principles of gravity. They are what they are Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 112 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Looks like you're the one who needs a lesson in reality. The meaning of terms is dictated by human consensus. Which means that you don't get to invent your own meaning and pass it off as reality. Wow amazing. My friend long before "human consesus" determemend the meaning of terms, reality is way ahead of it. By your reasoning, the earth would actually be flat as long the consesus decided it was. Free will is a simple mental choice brought about by biological processes. It doesnt need human consensus for that to be true. If you feel that I am inventing my own meanings, the pray tell please show how me demonstrating that reality gives us our meanings is invalid. You know Paul, its that thing called critical examination and actually responding to someones argument.
[qs]Even if you have, you haven't given any reason to consider it free will if that process is under the control of another or even if coercion is applied. [qs]
I have, because coercion cant have enough of an effect on actual choice, because, it is not a DIRECT part of the other persons choice making process. Logically it can only act as an influence.As I have demonstrated by both sound argument, reason, example and illustration (not a single one of which you have delt with), it is not logically possible for anyone to interfer with my mental process of choice. Ill provide you with yet another illustration, of which I entertain no hope of you actually dealing with. Paul said, "What man knows the mind of another man, excepth that man reveal it unto him. What man knows the mind of God except God reveal it unto hime. We have the mind of Christ" The same way I cannot know what is in your mind, until you reveal it unto me, I also have no way getting to your actual choices to interfer with them. While there were some exterior influences to Pharoah, nobody messed with his actual choices. That is not logically possible, nor does the text indicate that God hardening pharoas heart was anything more than hyperbolic language. You would have to show how it is both biologically and rationally possible to be "under the control of another" before just assuming that this is possible. Assuming that God was tampering with Pharoas mind, when most if not all of the text indicates other wise, doesnt help your cause. It simply does not exist as a valid excuse to assume that there is some immoral behavior on Gods part, for the secular fundamentalist humanist to find fault with the Bible Since you seem to be floundering, Ill throw you a bone so to speak, to help your argument along. You seem to be unwilling or unable to provide examples of a counterfactual nature. Try these Hypnosis and cultic influence
You mean that you can show a case where Pharaoh agreed to let the Israelites go even when God had "hardened his heart?" to make him do otherwise ? Then go on. Sure not a problem. Its called the majority of the story. Look very closely at these passages Exodus, 7:4, 13, 14, 16, and 22. Exodus 8:9-10, 15, 19, 25, 28, 32. Exodus 9:2, 7, 12, 17, 21, 27, 34-35. 10:3-4, 10, 11, 16, 17, 20 24. Exodus 11:1, 9. 12:31-32. !4:5 Since you chose to avoid the question the question in your last post, Ill ask it again. Is your intimation that everybody but the Bible writers are allowed to use metaphor anh hyperbolic language? Is it possible you are just working overtime to try and find fault with the text to begin with? When you use hyperbolic language with you friends and say "man I am going to kill you for that". Are you serious?
Nobody is claiming that Pharaoh lacked free will when God's influence was NOT applied to control his decision (except, maybe, for those people who hold that God giving evidence of his existence would violate our free will). So your "example" is merely proof of your inability to think logically. I doubt it very seriously. What is happening here, is that you are trying to make a line of debarkation, that you you would not naturally make in anyother circumstance. IOWs in other circumstances you would naturally recognize hyperbolic language and metaphor, but here your goal is to bring discredit, where it it is not warrented. In the meantime trying to not appear completely dishonest and unobjective. I dont think any honest or objective person is buying it I keep trying to simplify this so even you can understand. Not even God could control someone elses free will, as that would constitute free will, anyones free will, as at that moment, nonexistant. Come on PaulK you better than this I believe. You know the ole law of non-contradiction, right Paul? A thing cannont be A and not A at the sametime. The moment God altered his thinking process to eliminate his free will, or made him act in such a way to violate his own will, it would not be free will.
On the contrary, I say that it is a metaphor. Obviously God did not literally make Pharoah's physical heart, physically harder. If you wish to claim that the metaphor has another meaning it is for you to supply a meaning that makes sense in context. As anybody can see, you have not done so. Quite right, on the contrary. I have now done this numerous times. Now a simple reading of the above passages will clearly indicate that Pharoah was completely within control of his faculties, through the whole process. Since you are atleast smart enough to recognize some metaphor, it is my guess you can see the other in context. Now just apply you simple skills of recognizing some metaphor to your limited capacity to think things out. Given the text I have provided from that context, and your admission that Pharoah was already stubborn to begin with, there seems to be no valid reason we should not just accept it as metaphor. Bertot writes:Unfortunately, the law at times like terms themself, dont get to the heart of the matter. It takes skilled thinkers to bring things into thier actual perspective. I dont disagee with the dictionary definitions that you provided, only that they reflect a human understanding and perception, that is lacking an actual perspective from reality. The dictionary difinitons are legal difinitons not logical applications PaulK writes Being an arrogant and boastful twit does not permit you to dictate definitions. As you have demonstrated you are far from being logical or a "skilled thinker". Definitions are a matter of consensus, and therefore actual usage in real life overrides your personal opinions, no matter how much you try to glorify them. Being a simple minded buffoon, only a person such as yourself would not recognize that reality defines the parameters of our terms, we then decide what to designate the from that bases . You know Paul the expression, "from the root word meaning", thus and so. IM not dictating definitions, Im simply showing you logically how humans describe them and why Free will is what it is from a biological, chemical reality. The parameters, guidelines and limitations of what and how it works are there before we decide what to call it or how to desigante it in TERMINOLOGY. Now surely, even you are smart enough to figure that out Only a clown that pretends at critical thinking would suggest that definitions are a matter of consensus, primarily and only. Legal terms dont always reflect the reality of concepts and ideas. Only reality and reason can fully extrapolate how we use and understand terms and why we use the terms Bertot writes: Since I have demonstrated by the example of Pharoah, illustrations and other examples in life why this is not possible, possibly you could provide an example of what you are asserting. Its for sure that repeating this is not helping your cause.
No, I'm not going to abandon my point just because you can't rationally argue against it. So your only point is that the writer may NOT be using metaphor and that you have an exclusive right to assume that he is not, when reason, reality, language usage, context and every other valid reason would demonstrate otherwise. Youll stick by your point just to hope to bring discredit, where it is clear that it is not warrented? Any thinking person examining the context and see that after God lifted A plauge, Pharoah quickly CHANGED HIS MIND, in hopes it wouldnt happena again. But thats only if your willing to be honest and objective Perhaps you could provide an example of interference, where chemical alteration, mental alterations or removal of the thinking process is not involved, where a person still does not have the choice to amke a decision in the opposite direction.
So by your "logic" the ability to freely make choices in the absence of mental alterations etc. would "prove" the ability to freely make choices, Yes
would "prove" the ability to freely make choices even when mental alterations had been made to force a particular outcome ? No. Since this part of your comment makes the first part of your contradictiory, your statement then becomes nonsense
That IS the situation we are discussing. No. Not if that is how you wish to represent it Since this part of your statement contradicts the first part of you statement where you got it correct, it was necessary for me to seperate the two. You cant "force a particular outcome" where mental alterations have been made to free will. It would then not be free will. Since there is no indication that Pharoah was not ever in control of his faculties, especially in the passages I provided, only someone not paying any attention at all, or avoiding the obvious would contend that God forced his decisions. Hyperbolic language neither brings discredit to the text, nor does it show some immoral action on Gods part. If you could show some valid reason why an infinte, all powerful God would need to overide someones free will, just to prove a point, you might have an argument. All that is wittnessed in the text is Gods Patience, longsuffering and willingness to deal honestly with Pharoah. I find it very interesting that you cannot see the things I just mentioned, but you can only find ways to pick and find fault. Thhis says something about objectivity, or the lack thereof. Why would you assume my argument implies you could still make choices, "even when mental alterations had been made" Are you deliberatley trying misrepresent my position, to avoid my argument? Dawn Bertot
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024