The religious thank God for their hurricane

[Invictus ChiKen]

Well, she could have failed her rolls... or maybe they were too vulgar in nature, so paradox smacked her around a bit.

True and I do have a permanet +8 save vs. spells cast by members of the various chapters of the American Young Witch's Drama Club. It's +12 vs. there New Jersey Chapter (New Jersey Young Witch's Drama Club). So there is always that to think of.

Also Gods like GMs hate it when the players act like your only goal in existance is to sleep with them and they can tell you how to run the game.

[anybody_mcc]

1. If the world truly was perfect, free of death and natural evil in such a way that made the existence of God clear then our free will (see below) would, so the theory goes, be comprimised.

2. The ability to choose God freely, and to love God freely.

You haven't defined that free will of yours. What do you mean by freely ?
How do you know that we have free will here in the real world ?

btw as far as i'm concerned , the fact that someone believes in some god ( or is atheist ) is mostly a matter of your genes and prenatal brain development. Environment can only suppress this by controlling access to information ( medieval times , many countries today ). But it's just my personal view and i'm not sure how well is it confirmed ( or proved worng ? ) , but in this case there is no free will in the typical sense.

[Spyder]

Now, I'm willing to acknowledge the potential existence of genes that can indirectly alter desire for leadership and gullibility. A "Jesus saves!" gene however, I don't think so.

[anybody_mcc]

Now, I'm willing to acknowledge the potential existence of genes that can indirectly alter desire for leadership and gullibility. A "Jesus saves!" gene however, I don't think so.

Well i hope we don't find such a gene or a "Allah is a god and Mohammed...." gene , because that would be quite a nice proof for ID

I , of course , mean the first ones you mention , also i am not sure how much is it genes and how much brain development ( which is influenced by other things ). Also ability for critical thinking , ..... . And of course there is not one gene for that , but probably would be large complex of genes that affect brain development in many different ways other than this particular.
And by environment in my last post i mean , information environment ( education , upbringing , media ,.....) , not things like nail in the head or drug abuse.
And the point was that i think that free will was not so obvious concept , so The Guid should probably define it ( without using undefined word freely ).

[Spyder]

Now, I'm willing to acknowledge the potential existence of genes that can indirectly alter desire for leadership and gullibility. A "Jesus saves!" gene however, I don't think so.

Well i hope we don't find such a gene or a "Allah is a god and Mohammed...." gene , because that would be quite a nice proof for ID

Not proof of ID, but it would be strong evidence of genetic tampering. It would then be up to us to find out who or what's been dicking with our DNA and kill it. Something that can and will engineer us like that doesn't make it a deity, it makes it dangerous.

[anybody_mcc]

Now, I'm willing to acknowledge the potential existence of genes that can indirectly alter desire for leadership and gullibility. A "Jesus saves!" gene however, I don't think so.

Well i hope we don't find such a gene or a "Allah is a god and Mohammed...." gene , because that would be quite a nice proof for ID

Not proof of ID, but it would be strong evidence of genetic tampering. It would then be up to us to find out who or what's been dicking with our DNA and kill it. Something that can and will engineer us like that doesn't make it a deity, it makes it dangerous.

, sorry , i was not precise , by that sentence i meant , that ID supporters would use that as "proof" and that in fact it would be evidence to support ID. And i never implied any deity , just someone "intelligent" playing with our genome and "designing" at least parts of it.
But this is getting a bit OT

[mr friendly guy]

Are you saying that failure to become independent (because we rely too much on God) stifles free will?

Yes, with some frills.

Now that I know what you are trying to say, I can comment on it.

While it is irrational to hate someone who is obviously giving you such benefits without any apparent cost, whether it is irrational or rational is irrelevant to the question at hand. The question is whether one still has the ability to freely love God (or not) and the option is still here. The fact that the decision is influenced by some factors is irrelevant as all decisions are influenced by some considerations (not always rational).

<snip that part where you essentially agree with me>

So what? Why is it not free will if someone uses reasoning / evidence instead of faith to love something - or as you put it, a child is swayed because his parents give him what he wants.

I am not of the belief that one can reason to a position of "love". I think if we only pay someone lip service because they do things for us then then that quite simply is not love. If I chose to love a God who everyday made sure I wasn't killed by some natural disaster and made sure the crops grew etc. etc. then am I really loving God as another being or am I loving what he is giving me? To draw a comparison, if I may, to relationships in terms of partners. Some will love each other, some may just have a sort of marriage of convinience based on the pleasure they can give each other in terms of material wealth or sex or even just avoiding loneliness. Now it is impossible for any of us to differentiate with certainty but do you agree that there are differences?

Impossible for us (humans) to differentiate with certainty perhaps, but since God is omniscient, or at the very least " can look into people's thoughts" (by your own statement) that shouldn't be a problem.

Lets summarise - God doesn't protect us (even though he has the power) because that would affect the ability to freely love him because we can't differentiate whether someone is loving God for himself or his power even though God already has the ability to tell the difference.

Why should you love something who does jack shit for you?

Well I am not sure how to reply to that due to the inaccruacies of the English language. If you meant "you" as in "The Guid" then I would answer that God has done things for me. If you meant "you" as in the "one" sense of the word I would argue that parents love their children when they do nothing for them, children later love their parents who an no longer do anything for them. Friends and family will sometimes support another person when there is nothing to be gained from it. It happens. Its love.

I meant "you" as in general, not as in "The Guid". But you raise a point which I would like to continue. If God has already done things for you (The Guid), by your own logic, free will has already been compromised. Tell me, do you love God because of himself or for the things that he supposedly has done for you?

OK, I admitted that it was impossible but I maintain it highly unlikely and that some people will be swayed to love God because they want to feel safe. Especially if add fear to that equation. Love of God no longer becomes a thing of pure goodness, but a thing of pragmatism. Yes, one can still choose freely but that freedom for wont of a better term is comprimised.

Unless you are also arguing God is threatening people (perhaps with eternal damnation) or allowing people to threaten in his name, the fear part has no bearing to "the equation". Moreover in that case, how someone comes to his decision (eg by pragmatism) has no bearing on the ability to make that decision as 1) you admit people can still choose to hate God 2) Satan again shows its possible

Second point : since people who worship God do believe he exists with his " thunderbolt and what have you" (even with no evidence), why are you not applying that "are they worshipping God or his power" argument here? By your own logic free will is already compromised.

But I don't believe God caused this. God showed no actual sign of his power at any time in my opinion, just that people interpreted it as such. I am a wierd Christian to say the least, and was always viewed with a mixture of pity and suspicion at the Christian forum I went to.

I am going to be generous and assume you misunderstood me, as I never implied that God caused this or that you believe God caused this.

My point is that people who worship God already belief he is all mighty. Again by your logic free will is already compromised - are they worshipping God or his power (which they believe he has).

2) Prove God is all mighty, since he needs to rest and can be stymied by iron chariots.

Prove that I am arguing from an Old Testament, fundamentalist, Christian standpoint. . He is in the realm of death and immortal, that's powerful enough for me.

1) why don't you clarify your standpoint. So far you made some vague statements such as "some Christian denominations belief". Since you said you are Christian without much more info, where else would we get a starting point on your position besides going to the Bible?

2) The Titans were also in the realm of death and immortal - look what happened to them when the Olympians came a calling.

You (or someone else) argued that God showing his power in this world and such like was the equivilant to giving a kid some candy.

Try someone else.

I agreed that the child could still dislike what it is getting its treats on but is less likely to do so if the one that was giving the candy was actual an all powerful being - a being, that by some Christian denominations (I was referring to this because a lot of the arguments had seem to follow a Fundie line of logic and debunk it) can inflict an eternity of torment upon you.
.

I addressed this type of argument earliar in my post. How someone comes to his decision (eg fear/awe of this all powerful being) is independent on their ability to make that decision.

[The Guid]

That doesn't address the point I made regarding the clear fact evidence does not preclude free will. Furthermore, your expansion of free will into "freedom to love God" still fails to the same problem; evidence of an all-powerful, apparently benevolent being will not force people to believe in that being any more than evidence of evolution forces people to accept it.

I refer you to my later discussions with Mr. Friendly Guy about love being tainted and affected by fear and/or power.

I just felt a need to address this particular bit of idiocy. Is it your stance that "If we can't directly see something in plain sight, it may as well not exist or be real?"

No. I am saying it is harder to dispute what can be seen or plainly evidenced.

So what? Are you suggesting that because it can't explain why some things occur it's useless?

No. I have no idea where you got that from.

You haven't defined that free will of yours. What do you mean by freely ?
How do you know that we have free will here in the real world ?

Freedom to Love God. I appreciate that “Free Will” is to broad a term for what I am aiming for, and I have apologised for that. If you really want to get into a discussion about free will against determinism then fair enough but it ultimately ends, in my experience, in a dead end with neither side budging.

While it is irrational to hate someone who is obviously giving you such benefits without any apparent cost, whether it is irrational or rational is irrelevant to the question at hand. The question is whether one still has the ability to freely love God (or not) and the option is still here. The fact that the decision is influenced by some factors is irrelevant as all decisions are influenced by some considerations (not always rational).

I think I need to refer you to my below beliefs on a sort of “tainted love”. I guess, in theory, you can turn away from somebody who is all powerful and gives you everything but its not what I would really call love.

Lets summarise - God doesn't protect us (even though he has the power) because that would affect the ability to freely love him because we can't differentiate whether someone is loving God for himself or his power even though God already has the ability to tell the difference.

Ah.. bugger. That is a real blow to my argument. What I would want to point out is that God may be able to tell the difference but the problem is that people who might love God anyway will be turned to him because of his power and protection rather than simply for the love offered.

I meant "you" as in general, not as in "The Guid". But you raise a point which I would like to continue. If God has already done things for you (The Guid), by your own logic, free will has already been compromised. Tell me, do you love God because of himself or for the things that he supposedly has done for you?

Well I guess I need to qualify this then don’t I? It would be impossible to have a relationship with someone in most cases where they do absolutely nothing for you. However this needs to be balanced by what you give to them or else the relationship becomes perhaps dependant and perhaps not what God intended. God has given my spiritual comfort through his love. I have offered back my love. That is balanced. How could I balance him saving my life every day? How could I balance the destruction of a hurricane? Even children will make huge sacrifices for their parents in a good relationship.

My point is that people who worship God already belief he is all mighty. Again by your logic free will is already compromised - are they worshipping God or his power (which they believe he has).

I don’t know. How can I? I believe that God is mighty but that might can not be used for or against me but was a tool for creation.

1) why don't you clarify your standpoint. So far you made some vague statements such as "some Christian denominations belief". Since you said you are Christian without much more info, where else would we get a starting point on your position besides going to the Bible?

Because I can’t. I am still struggling to find my footing in terms of morality and spirituality, I am young and changeable. Right now I am a Christian because my country is full of churches and it’s the easiest religion to be in. I see very little difference between and a mosque but chose what was close.

2) The Titans were also in the realm of death and immortal - look what happened to them when the Olympians came a calling.

That was a polytheistic system where as the God I believe in is part of a monotheistic system. Big difference.

[Vicious]

Many Christians have, upon finding out that I'm Atheist, attempted to convert me and show me the light, so to speak. Now, in their attempts to show me the benefits of being a Christian, did they try to sway me with accounts of the bounties of Heaven, of the limitless joy? Did they demonstrate their endless love for God? No. They tried to scare me into acceptance by threatening me (or my soul, which is the same thing) with eternal damnation in the Pit. If they truly love God, why do they harp on and on about how horrible you'll have it at the end if you weren't a good Christian? From my experience, it seems that most of the Christians out there are in it because they'd rather not spend eternity being roasted. Doesn't sound like a whole lot of love of God, just fear of pain. If I held a gun to someone's head and said "Love me or I'll torture you for eternity", and they professed their undying devotion for me, wouldn't you agree that they don't love me, they just like eternal torture a whole lot less? I'd also like to remind you of the term "God-fearing". This term is often used in such a manner: "He's a good, God-fearing Christian." I don't know about you, but fear and love are not the same thing in my book.