R
R_Daneel
Guest
When?
- Status
R
R_Daneel
Guest
You are the one who kept on asserting that the “free will” does not include “freedom of action”. Whistling a different tune now? If something is embarrasing, start to say the opposite? A couple of eels in a bucket of slime are really clumsy compared with you. Tough luck. I remember, even if you don’t.
M
momor
Guest
Are you saying that you have tried to seek God and have not heard Him call you?
If so, I am very sorry and I can understand how that can lead to anger and rejection of God. I have been in a similar place.
God calls each of us in His own time and in His own way. I can only suggest that you try not to close yourself off to the possibility.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
your memory is selective as usual, today, dear sir.
please post where i have stated that?
T
Thing
Guest
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Hehe, I was religious when I was young… then I grew out of it. And to clarify something. I am not angry at God, I do not reject God, I simply do not believe in the existence of God.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Who gives the guarantee?
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Ok, I will look it up. And I guarantee to rub your nose into it.
M
momor
Guest
Ah! One does not go from being religious to not believing in the existence of God without being angry at God and rejecting Him, no matter how much you might like to think otherwise.
I am also personally convinced (and I may be wrong) that atheists who hang out on this website do so because deep in their hearts they are hoping to hear something that will convince them God is real. I’m glad. I hope you keep hanging around. As they say in AA, don’t leave before the miracle happens.
manygift1spirit
New member
Of course not. Rather it is the clarification of a job of government. Admittedly it is secondary to your questions about rights, but you did appear to mistate it (if I am misunderstanding what you were trying to say there, my apologies, and the clarification is of course mute).
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Nothing of that kind happened at all. Up until I was about 18, I attended church regularly, participated in discussions, and had a wonderful time (especially with the girls, even though it was a Platonic relationship). The pastor of the church was a great person, I still remember him fondly. Then I started to go college, and I neglected the church, but inside I still considered myself a believer. Then that started to abate, I was totally neutral toward religion. Much later, again, I started to think about it once more, and realized that religion is sheer nonsense - especially the Christian version of it. There was no anger, no disappointment. A simple process of growing up. Though I admit, it takes courage to discard your childhood indoctrination.
I would be glad if it happened, no question about it. Who would not? Of course I would be glad to see and love my parents again. But wishful thinking will not make it happen.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
**
**
M
momor
Guest
OK then. I’m going to pray that God knocks you upside your head so you can’t miss His call.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Unlike with God, in this case: ask and ye shall receive.
The thread was: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=412992
The specific posts were:
- forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6158242&postcount=99
Quote from the post:
youre mistaking freedom of action for freedom of will. a physical constraint doesnt change the ontological status of free will. you can always make a decision to accomplish a goal. thats your free will. you do not always have the freedom of action to actually accomplish that goal. - forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6247280&postcount=109
Quote from the post:
maybe you mean that free will doesnt matter if ones free will choices cant be carried out physically? in that case i would point out again that the ontiological status of free will doesnt depend on the entirely different concept 'freedom of action.' - To that post my answer was:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6249135&postcount=111
Well, here is a problem for you to analyze: a bunch of bad guys are about to gang-rape a woman. They have the “will” and the freedom to act it out. The woman - according to what you said - has her own “free will” unimpaired - she is simply unable to act out her “will” (to escape her predicament). This is what you say, in stark, simple terms. - And your answer to that was:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6249201&postcount=114
once again, freedom of action doesnt affect the ontological status of free will. they are two different concepts.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6482045&postcount=20
G-d could prevent every evil act. doing so would be violating free will, making us nothing but robots.
I wonder if I have to spell it out for you. If freedom to carry out an evil act is integral part of free will (as in your current post you stated), then it contradicts what you said before; namely that the actual ability to carry out an action (the desire of the girl being raped) is a different concept, which has nothing to do with free will.
Enjoy. And when you get that pungent smell out of you nose, repent.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
:sad_yes:
R
R_Daneel
Guest
We could talk about the “proper” role of the goverment. It is a fascinating subject. But, whether it is a “proper” role to prescribe and proscribe our behavior - which is what granting rights is - the goverment definitely does it.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
funny, but nowhere do i see the phrase “free will” does not include "freedom of action"
could you point out this phrase to me? because i dont see it here…hmmm… i seem to be talking about the ontological status of free will.
hint. i searched for the phrase before i posted. smooth move there.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Playing word games? You explicitly said that they are two separate concepts. When I asked about the specific example of the rape, you simply reiterated your previous stance - and avoided the answer.funny, but nowhere do i see the phrase “free will” does not include "freedom of action"
could you point out this phrase to me? because i dont see it here…hmmm… i seem to be talking about the ontological status of free will.
hint. i searched for the phrase before i posted. smooth move there.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
practicing selective memory again?
they are.
if i reiterated my previous ‘stance’ that was the answer.
R
R_Daneel
Guest
Ok, I guess, I will have to explain it in detail:
youre mistaking freedom of action for freedom of will. a physical constraint doesnt change the ontological status of free will. you can always make a decision to accomplish a goal. thats your free will. you do not always have the freedom of action to actually accomplish that goal.
G-d could prevent every evil act. doing so would be violating free will, making us nothing but robots.
So, listen carefully: in your current post you said that preventing our actions would violate our free will. In your previous post your said that being unable to carry out our action does not violate our free will. It cannot be clearer than that. You said that making the decision is what exercising free will is, regardless of the ability to carry it out or not. If you are unable to comprehend your own words, that is really not my problem.
- Status