What if you KNEW there was a God.

[JustWondering]

Do you agree with punishing people?

Punishment infers wrath. What is the point? If someone is a detriment to society they should be isolated from society until such time as they can be a functioning member of society. If they cannot be a functioning member of society they should remain isolated. Yes?

 

[Curious George]

Asking questions is one thing. Making claims is another. See if you cannot work your way through that.

Lol, still can't answer my questions?

 

[Thanda]

Punishment infers wrath. What is the point? If someone is a detriment to society they should be isolated from society until such time as they can be a functioning member of society. If they cannot be a functioning member of society they should remain isolated. Yes?

So in your society you would not give sentences. You would simply throw people into jail until you feel they have changed?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I had read it all, I was following it and there is really no reason to be snarky, IMO. I was merely pointing out that some things cannot fall into the 5 senses of perception. But my next question would be, are you limiting yourself to these 5? What if there are more we are, at present, unaware of>

Actually, it is commonly accepted in most scientific circles that we do have many more than five senses - generally the number varies between 9 and twenty-something depending on who you talk to and how you are defining a "sense". For example, pain (nocioception) and heat (thermoception) are senses that is distinct from "touch". Other senses that people often don't consider senses are hunger, balance and proprioception.

Not relevant, but still kind of cool.

 

[JustWondering]

Lol, still can't answer my questions?

What questions? You claim logic supports the existence of invisible, unverifiable things. I disagree. Until evidence is produced, the claims of unverified things is nothing more than pure conjecture. Is that an unreasonable stance to take?

 

[JustWondering]

So in your society you would not give sentences. You would simply throw people into jail until you feel they have changed?

What point are you trying to make? Why don't you just come out with it?

 

[Thanda]

What point are you trying to make? Why don't you just come out with it?

If you're not interested in this conversation you can say so.

 

[JustWondering]

If you're not interested in this conversation you can say so.

I am. Make your point so we can continue the debate.

 

[Curious George]

What questions? You claim logic supports the existence of invisible, unverifiable things. I disagree. Until evidence is produced, the claims of unverified things is nothing more than pure conjecture. Is that an unreasonable stance to take?

Hmm, conjecture? Seems to me you could stretch that word to fit just about anything, so perhaps you better define it better.

Yes I claimed sound logic can be used to argue for God. I then gave not one but two examples.

You then suggested that you wanted not logic but physical evidence because in your mind physical evidence was all that counts

I asked you

..

Out of curiosity have you a reason for requiring physical evidence? Have you a reason to assume the validity of physical evidence? What physical evidence have you to support such arguments?

 

[Thanda]

I am. Make your point so we can continue the debate.

The point is in the question.

 

[JustWondering]

Hmm, conjecture? Seems to me you could stretch that word to fit just about anything, so perhaps you better define it better.

Yes I claimed sound logic can be used to argue for God. I then gave not one but two examples.

You then suggested that you wanted not logic but physical evidence because in your mind physical evidence was all that counts

I asked you

I exist in a material world. I'm just a material guy, lol. Is there such a thing as immaterial evidence? A creator may exist. I don't dispute that. However, there is no physical evidence that would suggest what this creator is like, or what it wants. Unless you can supply said evidence to prove me wrong.

 

[Altfish]

Well people went to war to defend capitalism against communism.

The splits arise because people are people. You can have a great idea and all the evidence to back it up and people can continue to ignore you and do their own things. Human beings choose what they want to believe. God knows this. Therefore he knows that no amount of spelling it out would make people keep his commandments. So he gives the guidelines and he knows that those who are sincere about their desire to follow truth will ask for further guidance from him. He has already promised that the Holy Ghost would come and teach us all things. So the Holy Ghost comes to the humble and sincere follower and he gets specific answers to specific questions in his life. While the rest of the people go on in the pride of their hearts to bend God's word to whatever they want it to mean without ever thinking of asking him for the truth.

"Well people went to war to defend capitalism against communism." - usually driven by Christian dogma against those non-believing communists.

"So he gives the guidelines and he knows that those who are sincere about their desire to follow truth will ask for further guidance from him." How does one recognise these people? Does this group include ISIS and the Westboro Baptist Church?

 

[JustWondering]

The point is in the question.

Please clarify it for me, I'm dense.

 

[Thanda]

"Well people went to war to defend capitalism against communism." - usually driven by Christian dogma against those non-believing communists.

Yes, it is always religions fault.

How does one recognise these people? Does this group include ISIS and the Westboro Baptist Church?

"By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another".

 

[Curious George]

I exist in a material world. I'm just a material guy, lol. Is there such a thing as immaterial evidence? A creator may exist. I don't dispute that. However, there is no physical evidence that would suggest what this creator is like, or what it wants. Unless you can supply said evidence to prove me wrong.

So no answer to the questions?

Immaterial evidence? Yes, that would be logic and reason itself. The process is pretty fine tuned. There are even multiple logics. But these are the foundation for all positions. Including physicalism/materialism.

 

[JustWondering]

"By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another".

I heard a story on NPR the other day about a man who killed another man when he was young himself. He didn't mean to kill the other young man, it happened in the heat of the moment. The mother of the young man who was killed forgave the murderer. They are neighbors. The murderer is like a son to the mother of the young man who was unintentionally killed. The unintentional murderer regrets everyday what he did. He strives to be a better human being because of what he did. what should his PUNISHMENT be?

 

[JustWondering]

So no answer to the questions?

Immaterial evidence? Yes, that would be logic and reason itself. The process is pretty fine tuned. There are even multiple logics. But these are the foundation for all positions. Including physicalism/materialism.

So conjecture. Without physical evidence it is only conjecture. Logic and reason of what? What are you proposing exists without physical evidence?

 

[Altfish]

Yes, it is always religions fault.

Not always, but too often it is.

"By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another".

Talking in riddles again, why not a clear and concise answer. Has God not heard of The Plain English Campaign?
http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/
The Bible is hardly likely to win its Crystal Mark any day soon.

 

[Thanda]

I heard a story on NPR the other day about a man who killed another man when he was young himself. He didn't mean to kill the other young man, it happened in the heat of the moment. The mother of the young man who was killed forgave the murderer. They are neighbors. The murderer is like a son to the mother of the young man who was unintentionally killed. The unintentional murderer regrets everyday what he did. He strives to be a better human being because of what he did. what should his PUNISHMENT be?

You've replied to the wrong comment. Anyway I'm not sure what you are getting at. I am asking if your idea of justice - considering that you believe no one has free will - would consist of putting people in jail for as long as they need to be there until you believe they have changed. Further, if people already don't have free will, would you support giving suppressants or any other possible medical procedure that would make law abiding citizens.

I'm trying to see how deeply your belief in our lack of free will goes. To me it seems a logical conclusion that if people do not make choices out of free will then they are somehow forced to make them. And if they are forced then applying more force to their thoughts is perfectly okay. If a person goes to jail for assualt - give them an injection that will reduce their "anger hormones". If a person goes to jail for lying - give them truth serums everyday of their lives. Indeed we could just create a totalitarian society not unlike that contemplated in the movie "Equilibrium". We simply identify all the factors in human being that cause problems and we snuff them out with medication or surgery.

We would not be infringing on anyone's right to freedom of choice since they don't have it anyway.

 

[LuisDantas]

Translation?????

In this context, it may be something along the lines of "people should care about their connection to God and/or their fate in the afterlife enough to make an effort at understanding the Bible (or perhaps allow the light of the Holy Spirit to guide them in attaining a functional understanding of it?)"

I don't agree with such a statement by a large margin, but that is what I understand to be meant.