Purist:

You sure have every right to be displeased, but if I found the manual to contain half-truths, untruths and contradictions, I shouldn't be punished for treating the TV in a way that would eventually lead to its destruction, especially if I genuinely felt that was the best way to go about it as logic dictated. You as the omnipotent TV giver on the other hand, should have handed me a manual that is so clear and without any equivocations, so easy to understand that it would simply be impossible to interpret in any other way unintended by you. But since it is clearly not the case, you're the most culpable and should be rightly sued.

You cannot eat your cake and have it.

lolololol........the aim of the analogy was to explain why you have free-will. I think that bit is clear to you now.

You have now adapted the analogy to attack the creator. . . well, I'll oblige you....

The TV destruction is punishment in itself. You've lost the benefits of having a TV

Notice that you have already admitted that I am the omnipotent manual-giver, therefore the fault can't be mine. The fault must come from your ability to understand and keep to the manual.

to make my manual "impossible to interpret in any other way unintended by me" would mean I'll have to take away your free-will which you love so much.

You are contradicting yourself. You want freedom to make your choices and yet you don't want to bear the consequences of your choices.
You cannot eat your cake and have it.

Mr_Anony:
lolololol........the aim of the analogy was to explain why you have free-will. I think that bit is clear to you now.

You have now adapted the analogy to attack the creator. . . well, I'll oblige you....

The TV destruction is punishment in itself. You've lost the benefits of having a TV

Notice that you have already admitted that I am the omnipotent manual-giver, therefore the fault can't be mine. The fault must come from your ability to understand and keep to the manual.

to make my manual "impossible to interpret in any other way unintended by me" would mean I'll have to take away your free-will which you love so much.

You are contradicting yourself. You want freedom to make your choices and yet you don't want to bear the consequences of your choices.
You cannot eat your cake and have it.

There's no contradiction. My point is that you cannot claim to give me something and then punish me for not using it the way you want it done. That's not freewill, and that's my argument.

Purist:

There's no contradiction. My point is that you cannot claim to give me something and then punish me for not using it the way you want it done. That's not freewill, and that's my argument.

and my argument is that your punishment is in the misuse itself. If you destroy your TV, you lose your TV. If you damage your chances at eternal life, you lose eternal life. It's that simple

Mr_Anony:
and my argument is that your punishment is in the misuse itself. If you destroy your TV, you lose your TV. If you damage your chances at eternal life, you lose eternal life. It's that simple

You remember that definition I gave for hell as "nothing"? Here's the best way to describe what I meant. Like you said, the choice made is its own reward. Righteousness works out in eternal life a.k.a eternal fellowship with God, Sin works out in eternal death a.k.a eternal divorce from God. And what else is righteousness than right standing or right relationship with God? Or what else is sin but repudiation of relationship with God? (Edited)

The Holy Spirit's Anointing rests upon your words, my brother.

Mr_Anony:
and my argument is that your punishment is in the misuse itself. If you destroy your TV, you lose your TV. If you damage your chances at eternal life, you lose eternal life. It's that simple

Not doing it your way does not automatically translate to misuse. You assume that by not using the TV the way you deem fit, I'd be destroying it in the process. Not necessarily.

Purist:
Perhaps I should have clarified my stance earlier on. My main grouse with the freewill concept is its incompatibility with the concept of predestination.

It all depend on your interpretation of predestination.

Purist:
But when you begin to claim that it is God that gave this freewill (or you attempt to give the concept a religious feel), then that goes against the nature and notion of the monotheistic gods, because with them, "choice/freewill" is simply a farce (refer to Jeremiah 1:5, Romans 9:17, etc). Serve me or burn forever! Do my will or perish! -- dictator style; that's how they role.

Freewill (free-choice) does not imply control over 'every' outcome. the fact that there are more than one outcome indicates existence of choice; otherwise the only outcome would be for everybody to do God's will (that's the way i see it). or maybe i still don't understand what you are saying here

Purist:
......because with them, "choice/freewill" is simply a farce (refer to Jeremiah 1:5, Romans 9:17, etc). S[b]erve me or burn forever! Do my will or perish! -- dictator style[/b]; that's how they role.

aw com'on if God says he is not happy hanging out with armed robbers, child rapist, fraudsters e.t.c and decides to send them to the other direction (dissociate himself), what's wrong with that. you might see that as punishment (not being able to hang out with the Almighty ), but you have only yourself to blame. If you want to roll with God, you must be his kind of guy afterall he is the boss

Purist:

Not doing it your way does not automatically translate to misuse. You assume that by not using the TV the way you deem fit, I'd be destroying it in the process. Not necessarily.

lol, you amuse me even more. What you just said sounds like saying "not using a TV according to the TV manual does not necessarily mean that you are misusing it". I hear you.
The TV is in your possession, you can use it however you like. Just don't go blaming the TV manufacturer when your TV breaks because you used it to test your baseball batting abilities.

Zikkyy:

It all depend on your interpretation of predestination.



Freewill (free-choice) does not imply control over 'every' outcome. the fact that there are more than one outcome indicates existence of choice; otherwise the only outcome would be for everybody to do God's will (that's the way i see it). or maybe i still don't understand what you are saying here



aw com'on if God says he is not happy hanging out with armed robbers, child rapist, fraudsters e.t.c and decides to send them to the other direction (dissociate himself), what's wrong with that. you might see that as punishment (not being able to hang out with the Almighty ), but you have only yourself to blame. If you want to roll with God, you must be his kind of guy afterall he is the boss

Interesting examples you have there. Anyways, none of you has yet been able to demonstrate the freewill offered by a God who condemns you if you don't serve him. The "freewill" to choose otherwise? lol. The only "choice" I see here is the same offered by the tyrannical Head of State who allows his people freedom of speech, but then goes ahead to lock them up when they say something he doesn't like. The people have a "choice" too, apparently. If you want to roll with the president, you must be his kind of guy (say only what he wants to hear). After all, he's the boss.

If that's your definition of freewill, then I accept: God gave us "freewill" indeed.

Mr_Anony:
lol, you amuse me even more. What you just said sounds like saying "not using a TV according to the TV manual does not necessarily mean that you are misusing it". I hear you.
The TV is in your possession, you can use it however you like. Just don't go blaming the TV manufacturer when your TV breaks because you used it to test your baseball batting abilities.

Not when the TV manual gives contradictory instructions on different pages. The TV manufacturer is totally culpable.

Purist:

Not when the TV manual gives contradictory instructions on different pages. The TV manufacturer is totally culpable.

Here we go again..........scroll up to post 224

Mr_Anony:
and my argument is that your punishment is in the misuse itself. If you destroy your TV, you lose your TV. If you damage your chances at eternal life, you lose eternal life. It's that simple

Following the TV analogy, does the 'manual' represent a holy book or the heart?

Mr_Anony:
Here we go again..........scroll up to post 224

Well, you're the one that keeps bringing up the manual and assuming that it is without errors, and that if I don't operate my TV according to the instructions, I'd have to face the punishment. I'm simply showing you the other side of the argument.

Mr_Anony:
to make my manual "impossible to interpret in any other way unintended by me" would mean I'll have to take away your free-will which you love so much.

And by the way, you don't have to take anyone's freewill to make yourself very clear. How on earth did you arrive at this conclusion?

musKeeto:
Following the TV analogy, does the 'manual' represent a holy book or the heart?

God's law is written on our hearts. The bible tells us that the word of God is Spirit and Life. The bible also tells us that the letter kills but the Spirit gives life

Purist:

Well, you're the one that keeps bringing up the manual and assuming that it is without errors, and that if I don't operate my TV according to the instructions, I'd have to face the punishment. I'm simply showing you the other side of the argument.

When you have trouble reading the manual, shouldn't you call the manufacturer?

Mr_Anony:
God's law is written on our hearts. The bible tells us that the word of God is Spirit and Life. The bible also tells us that the letter kills but the Spirit gives life

Hmm.. so is the Bible written in the heart or on pages?

Purist:

And by the way, you don't have to take anyone's freewill to make yourself very clear. How on earth did you arrive at this conclusion?

I think God has made Himself very clear already. Any other clarity you seek would mean that God will have to brainwash you.

Mr_Anony:
God's law is written on our hearts. The bible tells us that the word of God is Spirit and Life. The bible also tells us that the letter kills but the Spirit gives life

lol, this guy and his antics. I believe musKeeto's question was clear enough. Does the manual represent a holy book OR the heart?

Possible answers:

a) It represents a holy book
b) It represents the heart
c) It represents neither

But as usual, you have to respond the Anony way. Hope you see why some us think you're being dishonest when you argue?

musKeeto:
Hmm.. so is the Bible written in the heart or on pages?

The Word of God is Spirit. The bible is the written word of God

Purist:

lol, this guy and his antics. I believe musKeeto's question was clear enough. Does the manual represent a holy book OR the heart?

Possible answers:

a) It represents a holy book
b) It represents the heart
c) It represents neither

But as usual, you have to respond the Anony way. Hope you see why some us think you're being dishonest when you argue?

I am not dishonest when I argue. When you ask a loaded question, I have to give you a true answer. The manual in the analogy represents the Word of God.

Mr_Anony:
I think God has made Himself very clear already. Any other clarity you seek would mean that God will have to brainwash you.

I don't think he was clear enough, else, there wouldn't be thousands of denominations in Christianity today (a result of thousands of interpretations from a supposedly clear "Word of God" ).

Mr_Anony:
I am not dishonest when I argue. When you ask a loaded question, I have to give you a true answer. The manual in the analogy represents the Word of God.

Okay, fair enough.

EDIT: But I still don't think you answered his question.

Mr_Anony:
The Word of God is Spirit. The bible is the written word of God

I hope you realize that Jesus taught/preached from the scrolls in those days, not the 'Bible' as we know it today. Were those scrolls then the Word of God?

I'm inclined to agree that the 'word of GOD' is written on the heart but whatever is documented on pages can easily be altered, changed or eaten by a goat. If these laws are intricately hidden in the heart, one would be able to find them without any external influence, don't you think?

Purist:
The only "choice" I see here is the same offered by the tyrannical Head of State who allows his people freedom of speech, but then goes ahead to lock them up when they say something he doesn't like. The people have a "choice" too, apparently. If you want to roll with the president, you must be his kind of guy (say only what he wants to hear). After all, he's the boss.

Lol! I don't see any similarities with my example sha, but no wahala. What about the case of a father telling his son he has to live right to stay under his roof. I mean telling the son to consider moving out if he must live a life of crime. Do you think that's an absence of choice for the son? afterall the father owns the house. So what God is telling you is that you have to move 'downtown' to live those guys that have been influencing your life (am thinking satan and his crew ). He don't want you in the house so other members of the household don't end up like you So you have a choice; live in the father's house or move downtown so you can 'chill' with your crew.

Purist:

I don't think he was clear enough, else, there wouldn't be thousands of denominations in Christianity today (a result of thousands of interpretations from a supposedly clear "Word of God" ).

So many different people failed English in WAEC. The problem is not with the English language, the problem is with those that didn't understand it.

musKeeto:
I hope you realize that Jesus taught/preached from the scrolls in those days, not the 'Bible' as we know it today. Were those scrolls then the Word of God?

Jesus Christ Himself is the Word of God

musKeeto: I'm inclined to agree that the 'word of GOD' is written on the heart but whatever is documented on pages can easily be altered, changed or eaten by a goat. If these laws are intricately hidden in the heart, one would be able to find them without any external influence, don't you think?

I actually hold that one can only truly know God through revelation. . . . .but then God has revealed Himself to us through Christ.
God has written His law in our hearts, but we still have our freedom of choice to choose whether to obey God's law or not.

As per your question (in bold) It's like saying because everyone knows the right thing to do, we don't need a constitution. That might be true but then people will break laws knowingly and claim that there is no where it was written not do so and so.
The constitution is there as a physical manifestation of their conscience by which they are judged.

Mr_Anony:
So many different people failed English in WAEC. The problem is not with the English language, the problem is with those that didn't understand it.


Jesus Christ Himself is the Word of God


I actually hold that one can only truly know God through revelation. . . . .but then God has revealed Himself to us through Christ.
God has written His law in our hearts, but we still have our freedom of choice to choose whether to obey God's law or not.

As per your question (in bold) It's like saying because everyone knows the right thing to do, we don't need a constitution. That might be true but then people will break laws knowingly and claim that there is no where it was written not do so and so.
The constitution is there as a physical manifestation of their conscience by which they are judged.

Were the scrolls the Word of GOD?
Before Jesus' coming, was there any physical manifestation of the word of GOD? Numbers, Deuteronomy, Leviticus?
The constitution is subject to change. It's a group of people (society) coming together and saying these are the rules we live by. It's written by men and for men and they AGREE to uphold its laws. Note that it is subject to CHANGE..

The same can't be said of any of the 'HOLY' scriptures, can they?

Purist:

Interesting examples you have there. Anyways, none of you has yet been able to demonstrate the freewill offered by a God who condemns you if you don't serve him. The "freewill" to choose otherwise? lol. The only "choice" I see here is the same offered by the tyrannical Head of State who allows his people freedom of speech, but then goes ahead to lock them up when they say something he doesn't like. The people have a "choice" too, apparently. If you want to roll with the president, you must be his kind of guy (say only what he wants to hear). After all, he's the boss.

If that's your definition of freewill, then I accept: God gave us "freewill" indeed.

Seriously now. i want to believe that your definition of freewill (free-choice) is that peeps can do anything (good or bad) and still expect a pat on the back. freewill does not imply that all actions must yield favorable results. if you want to achieve a desired outcome for every choice/act, you will need to have total control (you have to be God to achieve that).

Being locked up for making a 'choice' is just the outcome of that choice, it is not a lack of choice. it is an outcome the person cannot control. In the case of the tyrannical Head of State, one thing is sure; the outcome of making a particular choice will vary from person to another. for e.g. for any unfavorable comment, the punishment dished out (or delivery method) will not be the same for the man on the street, a powerful cabinet member or societal person (or even a family member). It's possible for some peeps to escape punishment for making the same comment. It has to do with the amount of control/influence each person can exercise; it has nothing to do with choice.

musKeeto:
Were the scrolls the Word of GOD?
Before Jesus' coming, was there any physical manifestation of the word of GOD? Numbers, Deuteronomy, Leviticus?
The constitution is subject to change. It's a group of people (society) coming together and saying these are the rules we live by. It's written by men and for men and they AGREE to uphold its laws. Note that it is subject to CHANGE..

The same can't be said of any of the 'HOLY' scriptures, can they?

Oh yes, I would say the scrolls are the word of God.
About the constitution, I would remind you that even with our legal constitutions, often the letter may be modified but the core theme of the constitution usually remains unchanged.

I see what you're trying to do.. core theme... no way I'm falling for that.. I rest my case, till another time..

musKeeto: I see what you're trying to do.. core theme... no way I'm falling for that.. I rest my case, till another time..

lol at least you got the message.....

wonder why my posts were abandoned...anyway enjoy

mkmyers45: wonder why my posts were abandoned...anyway enjoy

what posts? were you referring to me?