You will reject this...

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
You will reject this...

You're right. "Enlightenment"? Hardly. Wishful thinking? Most definitely.

#1. Yes, there is a God.

There is no evidence that this is true.

#2. You are not He (Him).

Granted, given my reply above.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Pink, human history is all about the excercise of free will.

I'll ask again, since you keep bringing up free will:

If someone put a gun to your head and said 'Give me your wallet or I shoot,' does your answer
constitute an exercise of free will or coercion?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Absolute versus relative are rather basic intellectual distinctions.

What a petty, annoying response.

I don't see any reason to think 'absolute' is a "basic" term in this context. I have no idea what "absolute truth" is supposed to mean in such a discussion. You seem to be contrasting absolute with relative. So is it fair to say that when you talk about something being "absolutely" true you are saying that it is objectively true (that is, the truth value of the proposition doesn't depend constitutively on any observer attitudes)?

Originally posted by Nemesio
I'll ask again, since you keep bringing up free will:

If someone put a gun to your head and said 'Give me your wallet or I shoot,' does your answer
constitute an exercise of free will or coercion?

Nem, at this point sadly you do not even have a clue... to your considerable detriment.

Originally posted by David C
You're right. "Enlightenment"? Hardly. Wishful thinking? Most definitely.

[b]#1. Yes, there is a God.

There is no evidence that this is true.

#2. You are not He (Him).

Granted, given my reply above.[/b]

David, you are a spiritually dead lost soul... make matters

you are comfortable in the darkness.

Originally posted by LemonJello
What a petty, annoying response.

I don't see any reason to think 'absolute' is a "basic" term in this context. I have no idea what "absolute truth" is supposed to mean in such a discussion. You seem to be contrasting absolute with relative. So is it fair to say that when you talk about something being "absolutely" true you are saying that it is ob ...[text shortened]... uth value of the proposition doesn't depend constitutively on any observer attitudes)?

Lemon, sadly you are correct.., you do not not have any idea. Wow.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Lemon, sadly you are correct.., you do not not have any idea. Wow.

Your response to everyone seems to be to tell them how ignorant or wrong they are, but you offer no information to enlighten us with nor even an argument as to why you think we are all so ignorant and lost. Do you perhaps enjoy being the only enlightened one, flaunting your superior knowledge and others ignorance?
Sadly it is lost on us.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
David, you are a spiritually dead lost soul... make matters

you are comfortable in the darkness.

I prefer comfort in the dark to self-deception in the light, but thanks for thought. Did you get that off a Hallmark card?

Boston 'Tard, with the notable exception of me, these are mature, intelligent people discussing the topics in this forum...you'll have to offer them much more than this to hold their attention and interest.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Your response to everyone seems to be to tell them how ignorant or wrong they are, but you offer no information to enlighten us with nor even an argument as to why you think we are all so ignorant and lost. Do you perhaps enjoy being the only enlightened one, flaunting your superior knowledge and others ignorance?
Sadly it is lost on us.

Begins with positive volition... the desire to know the truth. Your proud

cultural bias and negative volition are bent on resisting it. -Bobby



cc: David C.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Begins with positive volition... the desire to know the truth. Your proud

cultural bias and negative volition are bent on resisting it. -Bobby



cc: David C.

But since you know that already, and clearly do not expect any change, am I correct that the only reason for you to bother posting here is to flaunt your superior knowledge and others ignorance for the sake of your ego?

Originally posted by twhitehead
But since you know that already, and clearly do not expect any change, am I correct that the only reason for you to bother posting here is to flaunt your superior knowledge and others ignorance for the sake of your ego?

Nothing could be further from the truth. What I have received is all of grace. I also am debtor to all men but am

constrained by my respect for your free will. By the way, did you ever read C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity"?

Originally posted by twhitehead
But since you know that already, and clearly do not expect any change, am I correct that the only reason for you to bother posting here is to flaunt your superior knowledge and others ignorance for the sake of your ego?

Ever heard an old man tell a long, rambling story? The point is not interaction; it's to see how long they can get you to listen to them talk.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Nothing could be further from the truth. What I have received is all of grace. I also am debtor to all men but am constrained by my respect for your free will.

Thats nonsense and you know it. Telling us the truth would not be a violation of my free will. Posting on this site statements to the effect that you know the truth and we know nothing and are incapable of reaching your level of enlightenment is also not an attempt to show respect for my free will.
So why do you do it if not for the sake of puffing up your ego? Can you answer that? If you are truly a debtor then at least you owe us that much.

By the way, did you ever read C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity"?
No. I loved the Narnia books when I was young. Now I am older, I see them for what they are: a failed attempt to hide some of the problems with Christianity under layers of feel good myth. I still think he was a great writer, but he would have done so much better if he had left Aslan out of the books.