[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by Treghc

So, when someone states that God loves all, or that God loves me, they are lying and committing sin by baring false witness?



Again, evidence suggests we don't have free will. I'll get more in to this in a bit. At work.

This is why I said you're being an ******* and a troll.
HURR THEY DON'T MEET MY MODERN AMERICAN SEMANTICS THEREFORE THEY ARE SINNERS


Your neurological evidence says nothing about religion and deities. Nothing. Don't even bring it up. People will think you're right about this just because you showed we don't have free will as we think of it.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

Wrap your head around that. Physics is man-made too. As is chemistry.

The sciences are based on repeatable observed phenomenon. Religion isn't.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

Your neurological evidence says nothing about religion and deities. Nothing. Don't even bring it up. People will think you're right about this just because you showed we don't have free will as we think of it.

What other way is there to think about free will? It's all just chemical reactions in our brain.

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

The sciences are based on repeatable observed phenomenon. Religion isn't.

Observable phenomenon isn't physics. Physics is the man-made science that describes this phenomena to us.

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

What other way is there to think about free will? It's all just chemical reactions in our brain.

What? First, tell me what free will is in your opinion.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

Observable phenomenon isn't physics. Physics is the man-made science that describes this phenomena to us.

I said the sciences are based on observable phenomenon, not that observable phenomenon are the sciences.

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

What? First, tell me what free will is in your opinion.

Then we wouldn't be talking about free will as Treghc defined it.

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

I said the sciences are based on observable phenomenon, not that observable phenomenon are the sciences.

So if the sciences are based on these observations, and the observations were made by humans, and humans based their writing off the observations....

it's man-made. Get over it. Natural sciences are no more "real" than religion.

Then we wouldn't be talking about free will as Treghc defined it.

then use his definition.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Treghc

So, when someone states that God loves all, or that God loves me, they are lying and committing sin by baring false witness?



Again, evidence suggests we don't have free will. I'll get more in to this in a bit. At work.

Are you dodging the point? We aren't talking about the actions of Christians. We are talking about Gods character?

Your second point is irrelevant to this. We a
Have freewill according to the religion. If you want to talk about it let's keep focus.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

So if the sciences are based on these observations, and the observations were made by humans, and humans based their writing off the observations....

it's man-made. Get over it. Natural sciences are no more "real" than religion.

They are more "real" in that they're repeatable and predicable. Religion isn't.

Originally Posted by Treghc

But again, we go back to the argument of free will. Our most current understanding is that we have no control over our own thoughts. They emerge from nothing. This very understanding contradicts any notion of free will whatsoever.

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

They are more "real" in that they're repeatable and predicable. Religion isn't.

No they aren't. "They" (the sciences which were constructed by man) are a man-made tool for understanding the world. Just like religion.

The faith felt by Christians is real and repeatable. Predicting something like that would be fallacious.

BTW, treg doesn't define anything there. So please define free will.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

No they aren't. "They" (the sciences which were constructed by man) are a man-made tool for understanding the world. Just like religion.

The faith felt by Christians is real and repeatable. Predicting something like that would be fallacious.

BTW, treg doesn't define anything there. So please define free will.

Repeatable by themselves perhaps, but not by an independent party that can confirm. This is known as bad science.

I'll quote it again so you can reread it.

Originally Posted by Treghc

But again, we go back to the argument of free will. Our most current understanding is that we have no control over our own thoughts. They emerge from nothing. This very understanding contradicts any notion of free will whatsoever.

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

He doesn't define free will man.

Your little bit about that being bad science is nonsensical.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

He doesn't define free will man.

Your little bit about that being bad science is nonsensical.

If I told you I had witnessed something but couldn't reproduce it, it would be dismissed. Christianity has a lot of claims and very little proof of anything and certainly nothing repeatable.

He clearly states we have no free will because we're governed by the unconstrained firing of neurons.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Yoga is a religious practice. There are many forms with many results. Stop talking out your *** and go give a real form of yoga a sincere try?

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

Yoga is a religious practice. There are many forms with many results. Stop talking out your *** and go give a real form of yoga a sincere try?

Yoga is a subset of Hindu?

What claims does yoga make that it fulfills?

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

He clearly states we have no free will because we're governed by the unconstrained firing of neurons.

I know that's what he ****ing stated, I semi-keep up with that stuff myself (as much as I can given my lack of training in the natural sciences), and I am asking for you to state A DEFINITION OF FREE WILL. DEFINE WHATEVER IT IS THAT IS BEING DISMISSED. IF I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DISMISSING, THAT STATEMENT IS NON-SENSICAL.

You're right. Christianity does have those characteristics. But it also rests upon a presupposition of faith.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

I know that's what he ****ing stated, I semi-keep up with that stuff myself (as much as I can given my lack of training in the natural sciences), and I am asking for you to state A DEFINITION OF FREE WILL. DEFINE WHATEVER IT IS THAT IS BEING DISMISSED. IF I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DISMISSING, THAT STATEMENT IS NON-SENSICAL.

You're right. Christianity does have those characteristics. But it also rests upon a presupposition of faith.

freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention

Blind faith without proof is foolish. If I told you I was capable of supra-luminal travel and told you to take it on faith, would you? How about if I wrote a book about it and faked it to be antique? What if I had followers? What would it take for you to believe me?

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Blind faith without proof is foolish. If I told you I was capable of supra-luminal travel and told you to take it on faith, would you? How about if I wrote a book about it and faked it to be antique? What if I had followers? What would it take for you to believe me?

No.
So blind faith without proof is foolish. Well I'm going to sorta take this and run with it:

A nihilist who truly believes there is no such thing as "morality" is a fool.
A pantheist is a fool.
A deist is a fool.
A buddhist is a fool.
etc.
etc.

What is the purpose of religion, and does it meet that purpose?

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

Yoga is a subset of Hindu?

What claims does yoga make that it fulfills?

There are multiple schools. Why do you want to know? Do you intend to give one an honest shot or do you intended to call it all bull**** with no justification?

I'm trying to figure out whether or not I should waste my time with a good post.

Yoga is a vedic tradition. Hinduism is an Arabic word given to the many traditions that spawn from vedic text.

[F1VENOM]

Originally Posted by Gnarly Whyn

No.
So blind faith without proof is foolish. Well I'm going to sorta take this and run with it:

A nihilist who truly believes there is no such thing as "morality" is a fool.
A pantheist is a fool.
A deist is a fool.
A buddhist is a fool.
etc.
etc.

What is the purpose of religion, and does it meet that purpose?

To gain power for those in control of that religion and you're damn right it does.

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

There are multiple schools. Why do you want to know? Do you intend to give one an honest shot or do you intended to call it all bull**** with no justification?

I'm trying to figure out whether or not I should waste my time with a good post.

Yoga is a vedic tradition. Hinduism is an Arabic word given to the many traditions that spawn from vedic text.

I'm far too fat to be serious at yoga. I ask because for as much as it may not seem like it, I like to learn. Just because I don't believe you or have my own opinion doesn't mean it can't change. Otherwise I'd be a poor scientist. Many of my preconceived notions have been broken down by experience and the easiest way for me learn is through debate.

Might want to clean up the wikipedia page then.

[Gnarly Whyn (Banned)]

Originally Posted by F1VENOM

To gain power for those in control of that religion and you're damn right it does.

Oh, so you're one of those people.


hahahahaha. No wonder.