I'm sorry, how doesn't it?

Well, you're quite capable of defending yourself (at least to some degree), are you not? Why would someone else's ability to inflict harm negate your ability to dispute their actions through counter-force?

Well, you're quite capable of defending yourself (at least to some degree), are you not? Why would someone else's ability to inflict harm negate your ability to dispute their actions through counter-force?

What about young children, or if I'm unconscious, or if the guy just decides to shoot me in the back of the head.

What about young children, or if I'm unconscious, or if the guy just decides to shoot me in the back of the head.

You are quite able to defend yourself from children should you ever need to do such a thing. The use of force doesn't necessarily imply deadly force. Secondly, if a child tries to kill you, you have every right to try to stay alive. If you're unconscious, you lack a conscious will (or rather your will is temporarily suppressed), and thus it would be impossible to use your will to defend yourself, but neither is your will violated or superceded by the will of another, because at that moment your will would be inactive.If the guy decides to shoot you from behind, there's no guarantee the shot will go off or hit you in a vital spot, in which case you have the ability to respond accordingly, but in situations like these, I think you're splitting hairs. You could also say "what if the guy I'm defending myself from breaks all my bones?" etc.

You are quite able to defend yourself from children should you ever need to do such a thing. The use of force doesn't necessarily imply deadly force. Secondly, if a child tries to kill you, you have every right to try to stay alive. If you're unconscious, you lack a conscious will (or rather your will is temporarily suppressed), and thus it would be impossible to use your will to defend yourself, but neither is your will violated or superceded by the will of another, because at that moment your will would be inactive.If the guy decides to shoot you from behind, there's no guarantee the shot will go off or hit you in a vital spot, in which case you have the ability to respond accordingly, but in situations like these, I think you're splitting hairs. You could also say "what if the guy I'm defending myself from breaks all my bones?" etc.

haha, I didn't mean getting killed by young children. I meant young children as victims of murder. Just because it is in the realm of possiblia to get away from a killer or have a bullet miss your head, that doesn't mean it is actually possible in that instant. If somebody decides to shoot me in the back of the head and then actually shoots me in the back of the head, I don't get to will myself from dying. His will overcomes mine. You think murder victims WANT to be murdered? Rape victims want to be raped? No, we live in a world where it is easier to be murdered or raped than it is to defend it. Why would God make it this way? He could make a world where it was the opposite and we still had free will.

Why couldn't he take out the ability to murder at all? I'm still said to have free will but I can't fly under my own power even though I really really want to.

haha, I didn't mean getting killed by young children. I meant young children as victims of murder. Just because it is in the realm of possiblia to get away from a killer or have a bullet miss your head, that doesn't mean it is actually possible in that instant. If somebody decides to shoot me in the back of the head and then actually shoots me in the back of the head, I don't get to will myself from dying. His will overcomes mine. You think murder victims WANT to be murdered? Rape victims want to be raped? No, we live in a world where it is easier to be murdered or raped than it is to defend it. Why would God make it this way? He could make a world where it was the opposite and we still had free will.

Why couldn't he take out the ability to murder at all? I'm still said to have free will but I can't fly under my own power even though I really really want to.

I think you are operating under a different definition of Free Will than most, then. As I understand it, Free Will is merely volition, the ability to, in any given situation, review the possible courses of action you may take and act upon those courses of action without overriding interference or mental control from a greater power.

Free will does mean that you can run as fast as your physical structure and the accompanying laws of the universe enable you to run, but it does not mean that you can or should be able to run as fast as a cheetah.

I think the reason we are limited and constrained by laws of physics in such is so that we don't **** up our world any more than we already have with the little freedom we've been given and volition. If we all had greater power, think of how much greater the potential for atrocity would be. I'm glad we can't fly or will ourselves not to die or any other fantastical achievement.

You'd rather have the will to kill than the will to fly? (For all humanity not just you)

Don't debate with apologists, they are dishonest and illogical. Reasoned discussion with these people is impossible.

Don't debate with apologists, they are dishonest and illogical. Reasoned discussion with these people is impossible.

You know who else said that about apologists? JOSEPH STALIN.

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

You know who else said that about apologists? JOSEPH STALIN.

http://ganjataz.com/general-bollocks/images/by-GT/forum-shitz/pot-kettle-black.jpg

when i was at highschool (catholic) my mate stood up in the middle of school mass and yelled "JESUS WAS BLACK!!". It was hilarious.

He was escorted out of the church rather quickly. (damn him- getting out of mass.)

Carry on...

when i was at highschool (catholic) my mate stood up in the middle of school mass and yelled "JESUS WAS BLACK!!".

Well...he couldn't get a fair trial, and he did call everybody "brother"....definitely food for thought.

Good points VT, though i'm not sure the catholic church is the one to look to for change here...

You'd rather have the will to kill than the will to fly? (For all humanity not just you)

"Not my will, but your will be done."

God knows what He's doing, I'll let him handle it the way He sees fit. It'd be cool to fly, it'd be cool if people didn't have to die, but clearly God has seen fit to set things in the path that they are, and I trust His judgment.

It's not a matter of what I want or what I think. It's a matter of what is, what is not, and what I should be doing given what is.


Don't debate with apologists, they are dishonest and illogical. Reasoned discussion with these people is impossible.

Oh, so you know what I am, then? My reputation precedes me. :D So that's why you've been cowering in the shadows and hypocritically ignoring my posts. Since I know you're so fond of fallacies, I've got two for you, both contained within this short sentence you just posted:

Ad-Hominem
Poisoning the Well

Are you just going to sit there and illegitimately label me dishonest and illogical, or are you going to be a man and show everyone just how "dishonest and illogical" I am? If one such as I is so obviously in the wrong, it should be easy for a man of your intellectual stature to best me, aye?

Come, let us reason. :D

I've been reading the way Arthyron describes gods morality. It seems from his description that since god (according to Arthyron) is transcendent, he supercedes morality. He defines morals and ethics but is not himself limited by them.

It's an intreseting concept. And one that makes god look an awful lot like the Elder gods of Lovecrafts works, in that they are not amoral but subscribe to ethical rules that mortal men cannot understand.

So God = Cthulhu? Nice one.

"Not my will, but your will be done."

God knows what He's doing, I'll let him handle it the way He sees fit. It'd be cool to fly, it'd be cool if people didn't have to die, but clearly God has seen fit to set things in the path that they are, and I trust His judgment.

It's not a matter of what I want or what I think. It's a matter of what is, what is not, and what I should be doing given what is.

Or he just doesn't exist and life is a random series of events that inevitably leads to suffering.

I've been reading the way Arthyron describes gods morality. It seems from his description that since god (according to Arthyron) is transcendent, he supercedes morality. He defines morals and ethics but is not himself limited by them.

It's an intreseting concept. And one that makes god look an awful lot like the Elder gods of Lovecrafts works, in that they are not amoral but subscribe to ethical rules that mortal men cannot understand.

So God = Cthulhu? Nice one.
Not quite, my friend. Sorry if my explanations haven't been clear, it's a very complicated concept. God does not transcend the Good, God IS the Transcendent Good. Good has its basis and is entailed within God's very nature, and all other things are good in so much as their goodness resembles or is in some way an approximation or (albeit imperfect) reflection of His goodness. I'm arguing against the idea that God merely arbitrarily dictates morality and ethics (ala Socrates criticism of Euthyphro regarding Divine Command Theory), as that would render them arbitrary and possibly open the doors for contradictions (since in such a situation, the Good could be something other than what it is). What I support is a concept where God does not arbitrarily define these axioms, but rather what He defines are merely the relations of what is inherent to His nature. So it's very similar to Socrates other alternative in his criticism of Divine Command Theory, except instead of God appealing to a separate, outside standard of morality, that standard is His own nature.

The difference between YHWH and the elder gods is that YHWH possesses many qualities that none of the elder gods themselves all possess (at least not all of them individually), and the standard to which YHWH appeals is His own nature, rather than some external code of ethicsas the elder gods seem to be (which, unless entailed in some other infinite, transcendent entity or derived from logical principles is probably itself arbitrary)..

Furthermore, the elder gods have little to no concern for the affairs of humanity and would just as soon destroy the universe as look at it. YHWH is intensely interested in and cares greatly for humankind. The elder gods do not love, and YHWH IS Love.

So YHWH != Cthulhu

If you find it interesting and would like to read more about it, check out Robert Merrihew Adams (an Oxford philosopher) book "Finite and Infinite Goods." It's a great book and Adams is highly respected in the field of philosophy. His writings also reflect what is written in the Scriptures about God.


Or he just doesn't exist and life is a random series of events that inevitably leads to suffering.
As always, you're welcome to believe that, but I think it an illogical or at least less reasonable position, but that's another matter.

You can't have transcendent good. Good is a point or set of points on a scale of good and evil. You can't have good without evil or evil without good.
Evil is the absence of good.
Good is the absence of evil.

Without one the other is meaningless.