Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,079 Year: 5,336/9,624 Month: 361/323 Week: 1/204 Day: 1/21 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Prophecy vs Free will
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 39 of 168 (629798)
08-20-2011 4:01 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by frako
08-19-2011 7:04 AM


Hey Frako,
It is theoretically possible to have free will and for someone to have a prophecy regarding your action. Say I were to prophecise that a woman in red will walk past my house tomorrow at 6pm. That woman still has free will and could take any number of routes, or not wear red. However, if she does walk past my place, then my prophecy proves true. A proverbial spanner can be thrown in the works if someone I know talks to the woman. They could say to her, there is a nut job up the road who say that he is certain a woman in red will walk past at 6 tonight. She can use her free will and alter her route or change clothes. or, she could really fuck with me and do exactly what the prophecy says. Would it prove my prophecy true if the woman who had no intention of walking past my house did so in order to make me think my prophecy was true? If she told me later that she only did it to fuck with me, could I still say that my prophecy was proven true regardless of the reasons?
What I a getting at is that if the subject of the prophecy is unaware of the prophecy or is something that has no free will (eg an avalanche) then their free will or lack of it will not affect the prophecy. If they know about the prophecy, then they could use their free will (if they had any) to alter their actions to avoid fulfilling the prophecy or they could use their free will to fulfill the prophecy even if they have to alter their plans in order to do it.
A prophecy can be made regardless of free will if it is being made regarding something that is unaware of the prophecy.
I am not 100% sure if I have stated this in a way that is understandable to anyone but me. If you dont get it, I would say that it is my fault. Let me know and I will try again.
I noticed that Dawn Bertot and IamJospeh are currently debating each other on this thread. This should be interesting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by frako, posted 08-19-2011 7:04 AM frako has not replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 45 of 168 (629915)
08-21-2011 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by IamJoseph
08-20-2011 9:54 PM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
Hello IamJoseph,
nice to see you are a creature of such predictable habit.
It must be hard to lie to yourself so effectively.
The Hebrew laws are magestic - none have been able to better them to date or negate anything therein, despite this being an obsessive quest.
I have. And I have asked you on a number of occasions to start a thread regarding your claims so that they can be properly refuted once and for all. I have even sent you a couple of PMs with this request.
here is one of them -
Start your own thread with some of your claims.
I can easily defeat you and prove how wrong you are.
You have 2 choices.
1. Start a thread with all of your bullshit claims in it and try to defend them.
2. Admit you are full of shit. Not starting a thread will prove this.
I check mated someone in another such thread. The inculcation of negating the Hebrew laws as bad is based on horrific politics, not represented by reality and the reverse is the case. The world turns on the Herew laws exclusively, and no I am not a fanatic: I long to find other good laws and premises - try me! No Hebrew laws - no morality, ethicality, judiciary, etc, etc. There is no such thing as Christian or Islamic law; a law is not what one religion's followers follow - that is a ritual; a law is that which crashes all borders and is accepted even in an enemies' institutions [think, Hebrew laws], to the extent those who do not follow those laws are regarded outside the law.
I have not read any supporting evidence of any of your claims as yet. You have produced some of the laws and in doing ao have actually helped prove my point. i doubt you have realised this though. I assume by 'check mated' you mean you have made a convincing irrefutable argument and have come out victorious. This also has not happenned. In the lst thread where you started to vomit this bullshit out, i finished with this post -
IamJoseph,
Start you own thread with your claims.
I keep asking you to do this but you wont.
Your reluctance only makes it more clear that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, have no way of backing up any of your claims and are just making noise to please yourself.
Here is a copy of the PM I sent you in case you have not opened it.
Start your own thread with some of your claims.
I can easily defeat you and prove how wrong you are.
You have 2 choices.
1. Start a thread with all of your bullshit claims in it and try to defend them.
2. Admit you are full of shit. Not starting a thread will prove this.
Put up or shut up.
You have those two options. Your actions will show your worth.
I believe your arguements are worthless. I believe that you are an intellectual coward. Not starting your own thread will prove this to be 100% true.
You have not started you won thread therefore I stand by the statements that your arguements are worthless and that you are an intellectual coward.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by IamJoseph, posted 08-20-2011 9:54 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 6:04 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 47 of 168 (629933)
08-21-2011 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by IamJoseph
08-21-2011 6:04 AM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
I am Joseph,
THOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS.
I am an athiest. I do not recognise your commandments. Even when you shout them.
You should start a thread listing laws in the Gospels and/or Quran the world's institutions have accepted, rather than questioning me
Why the fuck would I start that thread? Are you aware that laws have come from sources other than the three monothesistic faiths?
I did this because you made posts ridiculing the Hebrew laws.
I did not riducule the Hebrew laws. I ridiculed your claims. You make various unsubstantiated claims regarding the Hebrew laws. Here is an example -
'ALL' laws the world follows come exclusively from the 613 hebrew laws - to the extent any party which does not follow those laws is deemed outside of the law. All animal rights laws come from here, as does laws if liberty, inlienable human rights, all judciary laws, environmental laws, worker's right instead of slaves, etc. The world does not follow a single law from any other sector: name one?
You make these claims in many, many threads. You have never made them in any thread where laws were actually being discussed.
Yes, check mate did apply seeing how there was no retraction and only continueing impudence.
You can imagine any victory conditions you like IamJospeh, as long as you dont mind deluding yourself. You have not clearly put your statements in a thread to be to be scrutinised. How can you yell victory when you are only playing with yourself? You will continue to get impudence until you put your own claims up to the test. Start a thread.
I listed about 50 magestic laws the world has accepted covering all faculties and over 20 animal rights laws exclusive to the Hebrew bible
You did list a large number of Jewish Laws. However, a cursory glance down the list shows laws that the world has not accepted.
243. That a transgressor shall not testify (Ex. 23:1)
247. Not to decide a case on the evidence of a single witness (Deut. 19:15)
The transgressor is allowed to testify. It is a protected right for them to do so in most western nations. It is also fine to decide a case with only a single witness. Some trials have no actual winesses as all. Sometimes you make it too easy to refute your claims.
As to the animal rights laws. The only ones that are exclusively Hebrew are the ones about animal sacrifice and Kosher slaughter. Your point that I was refuting was not that there were animals rights laws in the Mitsvah, I was saying that they were not all laws accepted by the world today You putting forward some that are does not change the fact that some are not. I easily refute your claims by providing a single animal rights law from the Mitsvah that is not followed by all, or even the majority of governments in the world. Kosher killing is the easiest example. It is practiced in many countries but if often protested against and is not the norm. It is usually restricted to a small minority.
You make statements like this (in threads they do not belong in) -
'ALL' laws the world follows come exclusively from the 613 hebrew laws - to the extent any party which does not follow those laws is deemed outside of the law. All animal rights laws come from here, as does laws if liberty, inlienable human rights, all judciary laws, environmental laws, worker's right instead of slaves, etc. The world does not follow a single law from any other sector: name one?
If you are so sure of your claim, start a thread and see how you go.
I have already tried to start a thread refuting your claims, 7 threads actually, but the mods assumed that they would not go anywhere. They probably will because you are full of shit.
Only you can start the thread. Only you are fully aware of your crazy claims.
Until you start your thread, my previous statements stand.
Your arguements are worthless.
You are an intellectual coward.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 6:04 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 9:23 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 50 of 168 (629943)
08-21-2011 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by IamJoseph
08-21-2011 9:23 AM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
Commandments are different to laws.
I can work as much as I like on the Sabbath, I can covet my neighbors wife, she is about 80 so I dont, but I could if i were so inclined, I make wrongful use of the lords name on a regular basis and I reject God.
None of this is against the law.
Specific to the false witness commandment you metioned, lying is not illegal. Sometimes it is the right thing to do. My partner is 8 months pregnant at the moment. She asked me today about how she looked in a particular dress. It looked terrible. Some dreses are not designed to sit on an woman who is heavily pregant. Now, from your commandment, I would have to tell her this. There is not way I would do this. It would hurt my wife and she would most likley hurt me soon after.
I told her it looked fine, but i prefer her in another dress that I picked out. So lying was both legal and the right thing to do.
Also, as an athiest, I have no fear of your god punishing me for breaking his rules. That is another reason I do not recognise your commandments.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 9:23 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by NoNukes, posted 08-21-2011 7:39 PM Butterflytyrant has not replied
 Message 54 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 9:36 PM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 62 of 168 (630006)
08-21-2011 11:56 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by IamJoseph
08-21-2011 9:36 PM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
IamJoseph,
I will try again to improve your arguement by means of education.
Getting frustrated with you is pointless. I will continue trying to point out problems with your arguements and try to help you help yourself.
I dont know if you are having trouble with the actual definitions of words or if you are being ignorant on purpose. Whatever the reason, I will try to help with definitions of a few words. It will help you argue more effectively and will help others understand what you are saying.
my comment - Commandments are different to laws.
your reply - No sir. Rituals are different to laws. A law happens with the world's substantial institutions accept and enshrine a Commandment as LAW.
Rituals are different to laws. Potplants are also different to laws. This does not change the fact that Commandments are different to laws.
Commandments can become laws. You have shown this in your own post. However, there are no laws that are direct copies of commandments. They need to be altered in order for them to be effective in todays society. For example, take though shalt not kill. If the law was a simple as that, every soldier would be in jail. very person who killed someone in self defence would be in jail. Every doctor who attempted a surgery that had a high chance of killing the patient would be in jail. Commandments can be used as a base for some laws. But the commansment is changed to become a law. It is one thing, then it is changed to be another thing. Commandments do not automatically become laws. Take the first commandment, I am the Lord your God, you shal have no other Gods but me. Imagine trying to create a law that states that every citizen must worship a God and that God alone. It would never happen in any western nation. As far as I am aware, it is only law in some Islamic nations.
my somment - I can work as much as I like on the Sabbath,
your reply - No sir. One day per seven rest with pay is obligatory as a law. An employer as well as an employee has this right and it can be legally enforced. If you can't do it in six you won't do it better in 7; you shall not live by bread alone.
You need to research your claims before you make them. And think about it a bit before you make it. There are laws in some nations that say that an employer can only have an employee work a certain number of days. However, there is no law to say that a worker cannot have 2 or 3 jobs, working all 7 days of the week. So, the comment stands, I can work as much as I want on the sabbath, thus breaking one of the commandments and also NOT breaking any laws. Also, it is not illegal to work 7 days a week in many industries. Oil platform workers, miners, commercial fishermen and most people who work in seasonal harvesting commonly work for up to 3 months straight. I have done this personally. I have worked on fishing boats for between 28 ans 31 days at a time with a 3 day rollover in port between trips. I have worked fly in, fly out at mine sites, 14 days on 5 days off. I have worked on farming sites where the harvest needs to in as quickly as possible. I have worked a harvest on one farm for about 20 days, then travelled straight to another farm for another week or so, then to another farm and so on. It is called working the harvest trail. It breaks one of the commandments but no laws.
There is also a big difference in enforcement between commandments and laws. One is governed by God, the other by members of law enforcement in the mortal world.
The statement that if you cant do it in 6 you wont do it better in 7 only needs a brief, brief moment of actual thought to dispute. Come on IamJoseph, think about it before you say it. Refer to any of my previous examples.
my comment - I can covet my neighbors wife, she is about 80 so I dont, but I could if i were so inclined,
your reply - Agreed you can. The point is you can also be convicted with a criminal record and end up behind bars. Its the law.
Can you provide me with the law that states I cannot desire my neighbors wife? There is no such law. I can think whatever I like. There is no law that I am aware of in any nation that prevents this or even discusses it. I could covet my neighnours wife, work to create situations where I could spend more time with her, seduce her, have an affair with her, get her to divorce her husband and them move in with me. I could do all of this without breaking any laws. It would be morally wrong because I like my neighbor (he gives me fresh rosemary and basil from his garden and always waves), and his wife is 80 and this does not really do it for me. If you can produce an actual law that states that I cannot covet my neighbours wife or even seduce her and take her for my own, I will retract and concede. But I dont think you will be able to do this. Saying 'its the law' does not actually make it the law.
my comment - I make wrongful use of the lords name on a regular basis and I reject God.
your reply - Agreed you can. But if done loudly it can land you in prison for incitement and hateful speech.
This depends on your interpretation of the commandment. Some believe that taking the lords name in vain is anything from using 'jesus christ' of 'for Gods sake' as a curse up to breaking an oath sworn in the name of God. I was refering to using the lords name in a blasphemous manner. Something I do regularly. It is not illegal. It is not hate speech. I can do this as load as I want. It is much more acceptable to yell 'jesus christ' if i hit my hand with a hammer than if I yelled 'fucking cunt'. Using the lords name in vain is not hate speech and it is not illegal. If you believe that it is, please produce the law.
As for breaking an oath after swearing in the lords name. Because of the multucultural nature of many western nations, swearing in front of the lord is not always used. In all of my court appearances I have made a swearing in statement because swearing in the eyes of a deity I do not wrship is worthless. It would be the same as me swearing in the eyes of Zeus. This swearing in statement is common in Western nations. Less common in the USA but in Europe and Australia and NZ and also I believe in Canada it is quite common.
,y comment - Also, as an athiest, I have no fear of your god punishing me for breaking his rules. That is another reason I do not recognise your commandments.
your reply - Ignorance of the law or your non-recognition of the law or being an atheist are not means of escape from the law.
I have already shown you the differnce between Gods commandments and the law. I do not recognise the commandments as rules I need to follow. i do not recognise the God who gave them. i do not recognise the books they were written in as influenced by God. There is no reason at all for me to follow any of the commandments. I do follow the laws of my nation. Some of them may be similar in some way to the commandments, but that makes no difference. I follow the law, not the commandments. I am not ignorant of the law. i am more well versed than most through personal experience and through my work. Can you produce the laws that you believe I am violating by working on the sabbath, by coveting my neighbors wife or by taking the lords name in vain.
I am eager to know what they are because it would mean that I have been breaking the law and avoiding punishment (jail time according to your replies) without even knowing it for decades.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 9:36 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 12:45 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 63 of 168 (630007)
08-22-2011 12:01 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by IamJoseph
08-21-2011 10:15 PM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
Iamjoseph,
Two things -
you are bound to moral/ethical/judiciary commandments which have been accepted as LAW. All such Hebrew laws [non-ritual] are accepted as the LAW - comprehensively and exclusively seen in the Hebrew bible.
This is an unsubstantiated. No evidence supplied, no sources.
It has also been proven to be wrong on a number of occasions.
The most recent is here -
Message 47
2nd -
if 20% of the human pop goes gay, humanity will not survive after a few generations.
How the hell did you work this out? Can you provide the maths? Telling me to work it out for myself or to prove you wrong does not constitute an answer. You need to provide your working as to how you came to the conclusion that if 20% of all humans are homosexual then the human speacies will beccome extinct in 3 generations. This may be the dumbest thing you have ever said by the way.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : Warnng

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by IamJoseph, posted 08-21-2011 10:15 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 12:50 AM Butterflytyrant has replied
 Message 67 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 1:10 AM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 70 of 168 (630023)
08-22-2011 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by IamJoseph
08-22-2011 12:45 AM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
IamJospeh,
I am going to assume you have serious comprehensions issues.
first of all -
No, your distinction, still bent on ridicule, is itself ridiculous. Rituals are applicable only to specifically directed people for specifically directed reasons and prefixed 'unto you'; mostly these serve as funny uniforms for postmen and reminder ceremonies. Thus it is not a violation if a Christian consumes pork, for example, this ritual was not given them.
What the fuck is that? Do you actually believe that this paragraph makes sense or relates to anything in my post? The only thing i can dredge out of it is that you thought the potplant bit was ridiculous. It was. it was meant to be. Its called sarcasm.
NOT TO MURDER is the correct translation.
Fair enough... I concede this point that the correct translation is though shall not murder. See, it can happen. You can actually say things that are correct. I wish it would happen more often. My point still stands though. Commandments can become laws. That does not mean that the ten commandments are laws. For one, there is no god in relation to laws. They are enforced, judged and punished by normal people.
You can work yourself ever second of your life. But the law of 1 day of rest with pay stands, whether it is maintained on a sunday or a friday does not matter here. Why are you argueing what is blatant?
remember what I said about providing evidence. where is the law of 1 day of rest with pay. This law does not exist. I provided multiple examples refuting your claim. Produce the law with a reference stating that it is illegal to work on the sabbath. Produce the law that states that people get 1 day with pay off every week. Keep in mind that you have said that this law is blatant and common to everyone. Why are you argueing when you could simply provide the law. I can tell you with 100% certainty that no such law exists in Australia, NZ, The USA and England. If you disagree, provide the law.
my comment - Can you provide me with the law that states I cannot desire my neighbors wife? There is no such law. I can think whatever I like. There is no law that I am aware of in any nation that prevents this or even discusses it. I could covet my neighnours wife, work to create situations where I could spend more time with her, seduce her, have an affair with her, get her to divorce her husband and them move in with me. I could do all of this without breaking any laws. It would be morally wrong because I like my neighbor (he gives me fresh rosemary and basil from his garden and always waves), and his wife is 80 and this does not really do it for me. If you can produce an actual law that states that I cannot covet my neighbours wife or even seduce her and take her for my own, I will retract and concede. But I dont think you will be able to do this. Saying 'its the law' does not actually make it the law.
your reply - You can - which is different from being good to do. A cost factor can apply even in hidden thoughts: if left unchecked, it will graduate to and constitute coveting [stalking] which is a crime; or even worse. Would you be upset if another coveted your loved one, you remained indifferent, then it becomes more serious? This is like the command to wash the hands before meals - it can save lives, and has been accepted as a law in the medical world some 250 years ago. How amazing this was made a mandated law 3,500 years ago!
Are you familiar with what moveing the goal posts means? If not, let me know and I will explain this fallcy to you.
Let me make this clear. You said that the commandments are laws. I said they were not and provided an example of how I could perfecly legally break the commandment regarding coveting thy neighbors wife without breaking the law. You agreed witgh me that I could do this. Then you go on to say that stalking is against the law. What the fuck does that have to do with it. Coveting is not stalking. Coveting occurs inside your head. Then you go on to discuss if it is morally right or wrong to do it. This makes no fucking difference. You were saying that the commandments were laws. They are not. It does not matter if they are morally right or wrong. It is not illegal to covet they neighbors wife. Your point is effectively refuted. The commandment you then discuss about washing your hands before meals. I can ssure you that there is no law stating that a doctor must wash his hands before a meal. You can refute this easily by producing the law that states that a doctor must wash his hands before a meal. Also, do doctors of philosophy count? Are the required, by law to wash their hands before they eat? What is the punishment for a Doctor of literature who does not wash his hands before a meal?
This 3rd C from Sinai refers to honesty and not to violate one's word or contract, which all laws depend upon. It is correctly placed at the top of all moral, ethical laws.
This is your interpretation. This is something that I think that you do not understand. Are you aware that there are people who interpret the scripture differently to you? Do you believe that you have correctly interpreted the scripture and that any otheer interpretation is wrong? You mention moral and ethical laws. Can you provide the acts that list the moral and ethical laws? This is you moving the goal posts again. We are discussing laws as in the judicial system crime and punishment. Morals and ethics do not have a code of laws. This would be the third time I have refuted your original points.
Just as the term species was adapted from the word 'kinds' in Genesis, you should replace the term commandment with law today. Atheists are subject to the law of the land.
The term species was not adapted from the word kinds. That does not make any sense in any way. There is no linguistic or etymological way that the term kinds could be adapted to the word species. It also makes no scientific sense as animals grouped into kinds are most often in multiple different groups of species. For example. Take a mosquito, a butterfly, a pteradactyl and a sparrow. All of thee would be in the one kind but are all in different species.
It makes no sense to replace the word commandment with law as they are two different things. I have provided many several examples of why this is true. Athiests are subject to the law of the land. We are not subject to the commandments.
I will provide another example. I swear to almight god that I will never post another reply on the EvC forum. I swear in the Jewish gods name. i swear this in the Christian Gods name and the Islamic gods name. I swear this to be true in the eyes of God.
Now, this will easily refute your claims that the commandments are law. When I next post, call the authorities. i am not sure where you are calling from but I am in Brisbane in Australia so just google a brisbane CBD police station, and tell them that I have broken one of the commandments. See what they do.
my comment - Can you produce the laws that you believe I am violating by working on the sabbath, by coveting my neighbors wife or by taking the lords name in vain.
your reply - 4th; 10th; 3rd of the 10Cs; respectively. Is this a test?
Yes, it ws a test. and you have failed. What you have provided are commanments. They are not laws. Can you tell me if you need me to define what laws are again. They have acts associated with them. Like the Environmental protection act. It includes the laws related to environmental protection. A policeman can come and arrest you fro breaking the law. A judge can hold a trial where your breach of the law is duscussed and you can be punished. This is what law is. Do you understand this? What you have provided are commandments. Not laws. These are not laws. Mitzvah is hebrew for commandment. Commandments are not laws. laws are not commanments. is there any other way i can say this so it will sink in?
my comment - I am eager to know what they are because it would mean that I have been breaking the law and avoiding punishment (jail time according to your replies) without even knowing it for decades.
your reply - Yes you would be breaking the law. Check with your local sherriff if in doubt. Ask him if atheists are immune.
What law am i breaking. What the fuck is wrong with you that you cannot understand those words. What law am I breaking. Show the law i am breaking. Hello, are you paying attention!. what law am i breaking. Go to a site that shows the law, cut and paste it into a post, add the link and then press submit. You have provided command,ents that I am breaking. The sheriff (of police officer in Australia) has no auhtority with regards to commandments. Commandments are not laws. I am breaking NO LAWS. are you understanding this.
I am breaking no laws. I am breaking commandments. This does not matter as commandments are not laws.
Even you, whose comprehension is as poor as anyone I have debated against should be able to understand this.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 12:45 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 2:31 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 71 of 168 (630024)
08-22-2011 1:58 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by IamJoseph
08-22-2011 12:50 AM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
IamJoseph,
You ask me to state my premise boldly...
your statement - if 20% of the human pop goes gay, humanity will not survive after a few generations.
my reply - How the hell did you work this out? Can you provide the maths? Telling me to work it out for myself or to prove you wrong does not constitute an answer. You need to provide your working as to how you came to the conclusion that if 20% of all humans are homosexual then the human speacies will beccome extinct in 3 generations. This may be the dumbest thing you have ever said by the way.
How much clearer can I make this.
how about this. I will use small words and put them in capitals just in case it is a vision issue.
here goes, are you ready...
HOW DID YOU WORK THIS OUT?
HOW DID YOU WORK OUT THAT IF 20% OF THE WORLDS POPULATION WAS HOMOSEXUAL, THE HUMAN SPECIES WILL BE EXTINCT IN 3 GENERATIONS?
SHOW YOUR MATHS.
Is that clear enough?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 12:50 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 2:38 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 74 of 168 (630031)
08-22-2011 3:09 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by IamJoseph
08-22-2011 2:31 AM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
You have not provided any laws. You have not refuted any of my points.
One has the free will to reject any law. Even one that says a worker shall have one day per week without work.
One does not have to use their free will to break a law that does not exist. There is no law stating a person cannot work on every day of the week. There is a commandment that many choose to ignore. Not a law. provide the law that you believe exists. it is a simple request that you have so far been unable to fulfill.
Coveting is stalking when exposed and noticed by others. There is no law against what one thinks - the infringement only occurs when it is actioned. The law against coveting is unique and the only one which impinges on private hidden thoughts - it is related to an obsession and planning, not mere day or night dreaming, and is usually impacting on everything one does in actions. Violations like adultry, rape, stealing and murder are preceded with obsessive plannings of the coveting person.
The Jewish interpretation of the commandment -
"Do not covet your neighbor's wife"
One is forbidden to desire and plan how one may obtain that which God has given to another. Maimonides makes a distinction in codifying the laws between the instruction given here in Exodus (You shall not covet) and that given in Deuteronomy (You shall not desire), according to which one does not violate the Exodus commandment unless there is a physical action associated with the desire, even if this is legally purchasing an envied object.
coveting is not stalking.
Covet - Yearn to possess or have (something).
Stalking - Stalking is a term commonly used to refer unwanted, obsessive attention by an individual or group to another human being. Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation, and may include following the victim in person and/or monitoring them via the internet.
Do you see the differnece. i can covet without the knowledge of the target. Even if I told me neighbour that I want his wife and that I was planning on trying to seduce her, I am not breaking any actual laws. Until i actually do begin to stalk her, then I am breaking a law.
I could obsesse over my neighbours car. i could plan to steal it. I could covet it for months and years. This breaks a commandment. However, until I actually steal it, I have broken no laws.
The whole market economy depends on people coveting.
Provide the law that you believe exists that makes it illegal for me to covet. it is a simple request that you have so far been unable to fulfill.
my comments - I will provide another example. I swear to almight god that I will never post another reply on the EvC forum. I swear in the Jewish gods name. i swear this in the Christian Gods name and the Islamic gods name. I swear this to be true in the eyes of God. Now, this will easily refute your claims that the commandments are law. When I next post, call the authorities. i am not sure where you are calling from but I am in Brisbane in Australia so just google a brisbane CBD police station, and tell them that I have broken one of the commandments. See what they do.
your reply - You are only exposing a failed attempt to turn a magestic law into corny. Swearing by yourself is your own affair, but put that in a document form and invest some loss factor should you violate it, between two parties who acept your oath - with consequences attached. That will cost you dearly.
You have it in writing. it is in document form. It is not illegal. there is no law against me taking the lords name in vain in this manner. Call the police and tell them that I have broken one of the commandments and see how you go. i ill make it more clear. i curse using the following words. I use them in vain - Jesus Christ, goddamit, holy jesus pissing christ. I swear by all that is holy that I will never post again on EvC forum. I swear this that I should be charged to the full extent of the law and will plead guilty and accept any and all punishments should any law be broken by my breaking of this oath to God. Is that clear enough? By breaking this out, there will be no cost. Because it is a commandment that i do not recognise, it is not a law.
According to Jewish interpretation - "Do not swear falsely by the name of the LORD..." - This is a prohibition against making false oaths in the name of the God of Israel, specifically those which are pointless, insincere or never carried out.
I freely admit I have broken this commandment on all three counts. My oath is pointless, it in insincere and it will never be carried out. So call the police and see how you go.
you go on to mention the fact that people swear on the bible and it is illegal if they are found to have lied. this is true. However, many nations courts accept that swearing on the bible for people of other faiths or people of no faith swearing on a bible is worthless. That is why we have non denominational swearing in statements. Because many people do not recognise the authority of the bible. I myslef have performed this task. i have rejected swearing on the bible because it in no way gives any meaning to the oath.
our comments regarding kinds being species have been refuted on multiple occasions. there is a thread regarding this on thie forum. argue your bullshit there and see how you go.
Commandments = laws. Thou shall not steal. Check with your local sherrif!
You are correct that stealing is against the law. Providing one commandment that has an equavilent law does not make all commandments laws. I have provided multiple examples of this that you seem to be ignoring because they thoroughly refute your position.
How about these examples, they are all Juewish interpretations of the commandments, link to the source is at the bottom -
"I am the LORD your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods in My presence..."
This commandment is to be aware that the God of Israel exists absolutely and influences all events in the world[23] and that the goal of the redemption from Egypt was to become His servants (Rashi). It requires the acknowledgment of the single God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the denial of the existence of false gods
I am not only unaware of the existence of the God of Israel. i reject the idea that he exists. I reject that he is absolute. I reject the idea that he influences all events in the world. I refuse to become his servent. I refuse to acknowledge the single God.
Looks like i have broken that commandment. However, I have broken no laws.
"Do not commit adultery."
Adultery is defined as sexual intercourse between a man and a married woman who is not his wife.
source : http://www.mechon-mamre.org/index.htm
My partner and I are not married. We have a child and one on the way. We have sex all the time. I am not breaking the law. i quite frequently and with great gusto and enthusiasm break this commandment. Good luck trying to make fucking while not married illegal.
that would be 4 of the ten commandments that I break on a regular basis. Lucky for me that commandments do not equal laws. I break commandments all the time. They are not laws so I am not doing anything illegal. Is any of this sinking in yet?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 2:31 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 75 of 168 (630034)
08-22-2011 3:46 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by IamJoseph
08-22-2011 2:38 AM


Re: Prediction Doesn't Interfere With Free Will
yet more evasion with no substance
my request - HOW DID YOU WORK OUT THAT IF 20% OF THE WORLDS POPULATION WAS HOMOSEXUAL, THE HUMAN SPECIES WILL BE EXTINCT IN 3 GENERATIONS?
your reply - I agreed with a thesis which showed how an accumulative impact on the population growth would result in a negative outcome with compounding factors.
There is no alternative to this mathematical fact. I never said '3rd' generation; it is ratio based.
Your answer does not support your statement. You have put forward something as fact and backed it up with 'i read is somewhere'.
Provide the link to this thesis. If there is no alternative to this mathematical fact, what do you suggest we do? Should we force the homosexuals to breed, or should we kill them off so that the ratio remains in the favour of heterosexuals?
If you would actually provide your source, it should not be too hard to point out the error.
Without supplying your source, it is quite easy and acceptable to say your point is bullshit.
as to the definition of few - You said a few generations.
Few is an arbitrary term but the following are the genral rules of use (at least in British English, American English may differ).
couple = two
few = three
some = four
several = five
many = >six
By few, how many generations do you belive will pass before humanity becomes extinct?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by IamJoseph, posted 08-22-2011 2:38 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 159 of 168 (631026)
08-30-2011 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by IamJoseph
08-29-2011 8:39 PM


Re: PROPHESY? WHAT PROPHESY!?
IamJoseph,
How exactly does this article relate to prophesy?
How is the "case won by a margin of manifest blatancy?"
That phrase does not make any sense by the way. I know what you mean but the sentence does not actually make sense. Makeing sense of a lot of what you write is kind of like trying to understand a cryptic crossword clue.
The Roman Empire was the greatest super power in history. A small privince alone challenegd them - and won.
2 guys hid in a cave for 12 years in order to escape a death sentence. It was not a small province, it was 2 people, one a 12 year old boy. They did not challenge the Roman Empire, they hid in a cave from it.
I am not sure why this is considered a great victory or why it is celebrated. Two guys hid in a cave for over a decade. Their only victory was that they won at hide and seek. He could claim victory in that he remained alive I suppose. I would say that they were so insignificant that it was not worth the Empires trouble to chase them down.
Hannibal of Carthage was a challenge to the Roman Empire, the Parthians/Sassanids were a challenge to the Roman Empire, two guys hiding out in cave were not a challenge to the Roman Empire.
In 1950, Britain and Jordan changed the historical name of Samaria to West Bank, a continuing genocide aspiration of Jews and history, inverting the premise of letting the truth set one free, and the notion of prophey.
What is the "continuing genocide" aspirations that you believe that Britain is involved in? And what prophecy does this genocide relate to?
Europe now wants to change the name of Jerusalem to Al Quds - foresaking even its own theologies if it can hurt Israel.
Al Quds is the Arabic name for Jeruselum. You say that Europe wants to change the name? Which countries in Europe? I cannot find any reference to this change. Apart from your claim anyway. Can you provide any evidence that all of the nations in Europe have any desire to change the name of Jeruselum to Al Quds. Can you tell me how any nation, or group of nations would change the name of a major city in another nation?
What prophecy are you talking about? What prophecy do you think has been fullfilled?
Are you actually adding anything to the conversation or just pushing your own agenda wherever you can?
The fact that hundreds of Jews are celebrating Lag B’Omer here, when almost no one even remembers the Roman Empire, is the victory of Rashbi and of the People of Israel.
I think this part is my favourite section of your source. No one even remembers the Roman Empire? Wander out onto the street and ask someone if they have heard of Rashbi, then ask them if they have heard of Julius Caesar. Anyone who uses words with latin roots is using a product of the Roman Empire. Check out a US $1 bill and note the Roman Numerals for the year 1776 (MDCCLXXVI). Check out the White House for a representation of Roman Architecture, there are Roman Aqueducts still in use today, concrete was invented by the Romans, in the recent riots in England, riot police were using the Testudo formation, a formation commonly used by the Roman Legion. It appears that plenty of people remember the Roman Empire. As opposed to the hundreds of Jews who celebrated this 'victory'.
Where exactly were you going with this post in relation to prophecy vs free will?
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by IamJoseph, posted 08-29-2011 8:39 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 2:08 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 161 of 168 (631036)
08-30-2011 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by IamJoseph
08-30-2011 2:08 AM


Re: PROPHESY? WHAT PROPHESY!?
IamJoseph,
The one who hid in a cave was pursued by Rome; but it is the entire nation which clallenged depraved Rome - and won. Christianity lost in siding with the wrong side, exposing a bad move and bad doctrines of racism, villification and mass murder, not to mention the desecration of magestic laws introduced to humanity. Attaching the prefix of pagan, depraved 'Roman' to Catholicism was a horrific premise, as if it was a merit!
Was that an attempt at a reply to my post?
The source you presented was not a nation challenging Rome. It was a celebrtion of one guy and his 12 year old son successfully hiding in a cave for 12 years. What nation are you refering to? What 'nation' challenged Rome? By Rome do you mean The Holy Roman Empire, The Roman Empire or Rome the city? What challenge are you talking about specifically? Why do you say that Rome is 'depraved'? Provide a link to what you are talking about. And tell me what prophecy this event fulfilled.
Christianity lost in siding with the wrong side
It seems like you are suggesting that Christianity chose to join up with the Roman Empire. Is this what you are suggesting? What group are you referring to when you say Christianity? Is this some group you percieve has approached the Roman Empire and decided to join them? Which 'side' should they have chosen? Who was the right side in your opinion?
...exposing a bad move and bad doctrines of racism, villification and mass murder, not to mention the desecration of magestic laws introduced to humanity.
What was this bad move? What are the 'bad doctrines of racism, vilification and mass murder'? Are they unique to the group that they chose? What is this desecration of magestic laws you are talking about?
Attaching the prefix of pagan, depraved 'Roman' to Catholicism was a horrific premise, as if it was a merit!
The terms 'Romish Catholic' and 'Roman Catholic', along with 'Popish Catholic' were introduced by the Church of England in the 16th century. The term 'Roman Catholic Church' is a recent addition which the church itself rarely uses. (source : The resource cannot be found.). So what is your point? Why is do you use the word 'pagan' as if it is a negative thing? Why were they 'depraved'
Why do you suggest that Romans adding the word Roman to the business of Catholic issues occuring in Rome is a 'horrific premise'?
You can have another go at replying to my post instead of ranting random crap unrelated to the topic if you want.
You seem to think you have something valid to say about prophecy when you went down this road.
What is it that you have to say about the topic?
Are you suggesting that
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 2:08 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 2:55 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 163 of 168 (631050)
08-30-2011 4:32 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by IamJoseph
08-30-2011 2:55 AM


Re: PROPHESY? WHAT PROPHESY!?
IamJoseph,
But you have more immediate issues to deal with if you want to assist Christianity.
I have no desire to assist Christianity. I believe the world would be a better place without the the big monotheistic religions.
It looks like a 'reverse-prophesy' what is occuring and coming soon to a theatre near you.
What the hell is a reverse prophecy?

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 2:55 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 4:50 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 165 of 168 (631055)
08-30-2011 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by IamJoseph
08-30-2011 4:50 AM


Re: PROPHESY? WHAT PROPHESY!?
There's only one.
Highlander?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 4:50 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 5:33 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 167 of 168 (631061)
08-30-2011 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by IamJoseph
08-30-2011 5:33 AM


Re: PROPHESY? WHAT PROPHESY!?
THOU (you) SHALL HAVE NO OTHER gods BEFORE ME (the Lord)!
great.
What is your point?
Is this some kind of a fucking guessing game?
Have you any intention of actually making a point?
After deconstructing all of your arguements to this point, your remaining option is cryptic clues and random biblical quotes?
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 5:33 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by IamJoseph, posted 08-30-2011 7:24 AM Butterflytyrant has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024