Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

71 (27.7%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

114 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (23.8%)

Total Members Voted: 251

[TD1]

There is substantial evidence to suggest that Judaism began as a polytheistic religion, of which Yahweh was only one god. Eventually, shifts in society lead to him being declared first an predominant god and then the one and only god.

Could you give some examples? I don't doubt, just curious.

[wierd]

"The fact that the dishes happen to be sentient does not give them permission to run away with the flatware, no matter how cute that spoon is."

Rather than talk about hypothetic sentient dishes that you bought from a store, you could build a scenario around legitimately acquired slaves deciding for themselves to serve a different master, might be more plausible. Or better yet, your daughters marrying someone of their own choosing rather than marrying you the husband you chose for them

e: i've another idea, since you could argue that gods sentience is superior while masters\slaves\fathers\daughters are roughly the same class of creature, being pissed at your young children because they prefer the company of their favorite uncle rather than your own

Ironically, the "dishes running away" thing has a biblical counterpart, with the parable of the potter and the clay.

It is still essentially the same idea-- The clay rebelling against the potter, and the potter choosing to crush the pot he was working on and start over. The potter has a specific goal in mind, and when the clay is unwilling to uphold the shape directed by the potter, he does not give in to the demands of the clay, but instead smashes it all up, and recasts it into a new pot.

There are numerous references to this metaphor in the bible.  I just decided to make it a little more cute, and collude it with the fairytale nature I see it possessing. The core meaning remains the same though:  The creator has a specific purpose in his work of creation; when the creation rebells against the purpose for which it was created, isn't it natural for that creator to get a bit mad at the creation?

[origamiscienceguy]

Rebuttal: Creflo Dollar.

I don't know what that means.

[TD1]

Preaches on the importance of wealth, lives a lavish lifestyle. His fruit is money, not love.

[Rolepgeek]

The plates thing would make sense, but then why does he bother giving us free will?

Like, it just seems like He's setting himself/humanity up for failure, here, as compared to doing what He made them for.

Plus, you could ask why God feels the need to create a species specifically with the purpose of worshipping him in mind. Doesn't seem, at least, like the best motives, but maybe that's just me.

[origamiscienceguy]

The plates thing would make sense, but then why does he bother giving us free will?

Like, it just seems like He's setting himself/humanity up for failure, here, as compared to doing what He made them for.

Plus, you could ask why God feels the need to create a species specifically with the purpose of worshipping him in mind. Doesn't seem, at least, like the best motives, but maybe that's just me.

He also created us to love us. In heaven, we will keep our free will, but there would be no more desire to sin. So we still have free will after death.

[TD1]

What you're saying is he takes away "the desire to sin."

He limits your ability to choose.

[origamiscienceguy]

What you're saying is he takes away "the desire to sin."

He limits your ability to choose.

We will no longer have a sinful nature, and sinning is foolish, so we won't do it.

[penguinofhonor]

If he can take away our desire to sin while preserving our free will, why not do that from the start?

[Bohandas]

The plates thing would make sense, but then why does he bother giving us free will?

Like, it just seems like He's setting himself/humanity up for failure, here, as compared to doing what He made them for.

Even more than that is that we have the desire to sin. It wouldn't be a problem if we weren't designed to enjoy the forbidden stuff more.

[origamiscienceguy]

If he can take away our desire to sin while preserving our free will, why not do that from the start?

Because Adam and Eve sinned.

[penguinofhonor]

I meant before that even. Why create Adam and Eve with the desire to sin?

[Orange Wizard]

So that everyone else ends up sinful and he can save some of them later.

[origamiscienceguy]

I meant before that even. Why create Adam and Eve with the desire to sin?

Satan gave them the desire to sin. He tempted them. In heaven, there will be no temptation.

[Rolepgeek]

Why did Satan sin?

Wasn't he originally in Heaven? If there was/is no temptation to sin in Heaven, why did Lucifer break away from God?

And if all Heaven does to 'purify' you, so to speak, is freedom from temptation, and even the original creations of God could be tempted, is the only thing that makes one good that one is not exposed to temptation?

I suppose another way to put it; if Human sin stems from Adam and Eve, and their sin came from Lucifer's temptation, who tempted Lucifer?

Also, less relevant, why did God leave that tree lying about in the first place? Or allow Lucifer to taint his creations/garden? If he's Omniscient, he would have known what would happen.