It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Free Will and Asking God for Help

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


You wrote:

["The point is though that it would be people like you who put Jesus on the cross.
Prove it, prove it, prove it.
See it does not matter what you say or any body else says you only care about what you believe to be true and you would fight to the death or have someone killed for it.
You would pull peoples fingernails out."]

What weird postulates on my character, methodology and motives. Are they also to be taken as "true, because it's true?"

Considering your almost constant ignoring of my questions, and your present active denial of 'proof'', (evidence, validation etc. .... my insert) it appears to be complete subjectivism, you're operating with. If I'm wrong about this, you have ofcourse the option of presenting your own version of the use of 'objective procedure' necessary for communication, instead of subjective preaching.

Translated to 'normalese' it means, that claims don't become 'true' because they are CLAIMED 'true'.

I can see, we have a long way to go, before we can arrive at 'free will' as a reciprocially communicable point.




posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


You wrote this:
PS Later addition to this post. I'm unable to look at internet-videos; and quite honestly, I'm not much motivated for it either. A forum communication based on references to authorities is mostly quite pointless, unless it's a question of just presenting various forms of 'definitions'/outlining positions. End quote.

reply to edit:
I can understand your lack of motivation, it is this that keeps you in the superior position. You will always be the king of (limited) knowledge in your own mind.
Stay with your reliable box of ideas.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


Again, you have nothing to say for yourself.
What are you saying? What are you creating?
What is your intention?
Do you have anything to add?

Again, i ask why initially agree, as you did on the first three replies and then move in to destroy?
Are you conscious that you do this?

So is there anything i need to answer?


edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


I can not stop you from feeling inferior or opposed to me, however if only you could see that there is no separation then you would feel whole. This wholeness is us. Is this!!
You are compelled to make me lower than you, to make you higher. But it does not work like this. I do not have to blow your candle out to make mine shine.
It shines regardless.
edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


To cut through the 'holier/bigger than you' sidetrack, I can once again define my own position:

I operate with 'relative realities', inside which some claims/methods/conclusions have a rather specific, but approximate 'truth'. I.e. the 'map' science/logic describes the territory of cosmos far better than any other perspective.

Consequently I seldom (if ever) present general absolutes, only 'partial' absolutes fitting to 'local' relative realities.

*****

In two of the related european languages I'm familiar with, the exactly same word (spelling and phonetically) means two completely different things. The consensus of definition (in each of the two languages) makes the use of this word meaningful in each language, but not meaningful when trangressing local definitions.

Such a consensus also exists in contexts more complex than just single words; complex contexts where the definitions also give meaning in communication. And your unwillingness to relate or refer to such basic requests for definitions (and thus communication) surprises me.

For a starter you could take a look at the 'official' definitions of 'subjective' and 'objective', and the consequences of these concepts. Instead of excessively commenting on my motives (which you're only guessing at), my character (do) and my competence (do); such a type of commenting being a pointless activity, if it becomes the main content of posting.

You appear to take my rejection of "it's true, because it's true" (i.e. claiming 'truths' without validation) as an effort to 'corner you'. But I'm willing to go as far, as I can epistemologically (i.e.: 'How do we know, what we know') to create a common communication basis.

Seemingly you either don't understand the implications of this offer, or you reject it from reasons unknown to me. In that case, state your objections, and I'll try to work my way to common communication via different paths.

But I'll never accept "it's true, because it's true" fitting into the concept 'objectivity' necessary for communication, and my next post COULD very well be an 'it's true, because it's true' build on the flying spaghetti monster having his home on the moon, which is made of cheese.


edit on 30-5-2011 by bogomil because: clarifying addition



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


Freewill can not be proven.
This is the begining and the end of my original post that moved you to respond to me.

I wrote;
There is no way we can prove we have free will. We might think about a decision that needs to be made for days, yet when we do decide what is it that made us decide the final decision?
Try not making decisions until the moment it is needed instead of wasting all that brain power and worry. The 'choice' is true in the moment. It is Gods way.
It always is anyway but you get a rest from the mind.

It makes no sense whatsoever to agree with an opinion then destroy the messenger.



edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


If you don't want to respond to my direct questions, please inform me as a courtesy.

Your repetition of postulates I understood the first time is meaningless for me.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


What direct questions are those?
I don't think i 'owe' you any courtesy! However, i can be courteous.

I know what i say is meaningless for you.
So it matters not what the questions are. The questions are meaningless.
And the answers i give will also (again) be meaningless.

It is a shame that english is not your first language, i feel this is a hindrance in our communications.
edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by bogomil
 


What direct questions are those?
I don't think i 'owe' you any courtesy! However, i can be courteous.

I know what i say is meaningless for you.
So it matters not what the questions are. The questions are meaningless.
And the answers i give will also (again) be meaningless.

It is a shame that english is not your first language, i feel this is a hindrance in our communications.
edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)


I take the above as a 'no', considered pragmatically.

Quote: ["It is a shame that english is not your first language, i feel this is a hindrance in our communications."]

'I' is actually spelled with a capital 'I', but that doesn't prevent me from understanding you. None of us are here to 'correct essays' as a last desperate resort.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join