Love is an emotion and empathy is an understanding.
Both exist in the natural world.
Faith, an emotion and an understanding, exists in the natural world too.
No one claims faith doesn’t exist. What is your point?
my point was the same point that the poster made about love and empathy
No, that was in response to someone claiming that love and empathy are supernatural. You are the only one who brought up faith. Again, what was your intended point?
To add to the conversation.
Non-sequitur does not add to the conversation, it is exactly the opposite.
We're adding to it, lol...but those were vague definitions that make even God exist. The original "emotion/understanding" poster, responded to someone who gave God the definition of love, basically told them, their God exists.
I'll try a different definition of God.
An infinite, all-powerful good.
Really? Then how do we explain all the $h!t in the world?
really? new to internet religious debates? lol...free will
but perhaps you didn't have the will to ignore....hmmm
and this is getting off topic
You're not trying to make your point and then stop the discussion there, are you?
Do you believe in heaven? Is there free will in heaven? If so then it is possible for god to create a world with free will and no suffering/evil, so that argument is defeated.
lol...me again, and actually I'm a believer in life is a paradox, so I'm not happy with my thought process' unless I find the paradox.
I do not understand your response or how it relates to the posts it follows. Respectfully requesting explanation.
The previous poster pointed out the free will paradox. If you don't understand, look it up, it is older than the greeks.
Yes I know about that. Not what I asked. The paradox is whether or not free will exists - for this discussion I will grant that it does. I asked if, in your belief system, it exists in heaven.
IDK, I've never been there, why do you want to know?
It is not something I've really thought about or care to think about. Sorry.
If you read my post that you replied to, you’d know why I want to know and why I ask.
Would you like to do that and then respond?
and I gave you my answer. What else did you need to know?
You answer is a non answer. Thats fine, you can bow out . I would also.
I don't think you understand. I know free will is an illusion, why would I want to entertain some inane debate on it.
It's much like Einstein's quote "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." except that for free will, I'd say, Free Will is merely an illusion albeit a very important one. No need to let killers know they played no role in their crimes. We need it in order to keep a functioning society.
Really, you think it is an illusion, yet at 04/08/2025 11:10 you use it to explain the problem of evil?
That's the level we are at here?
My advice: Just go with the hard solipsism defense for god then, say we can't know anything and leave it at that. Much harder to defeat than the weak tea being served here every day.
um, I'm rereading our discussion, and yes I can see, you must have taken my "free will" comment seriously, I guess the "lol" wasn't a good enough clue. I'll ignore the snark as you were probably arguing in your own mind.
So, five posts later, you say "just kidding!"
Sigh... well it is my bad for playing on DCUM I guess.
You just need to read exactly what people say and not what you want to see. I pointed out early on the free will paradox was older than the greeks, that should have been a clue I knew the argument. That's why I asked if you were new to the internet. That argument has been in the internet atheist playbook since ... before usenet I imagine.
BS. Just answer the question I’m not interested in things I google. I wanna know what you think.
And although the argument may be old your inability to answer is equally old.
Love is an emotion and empathy is an understanding.
Both exist in the natural world.
Faith, an emotion and an understanding, exists in the natural world too.
No one claims faith doesn’t exist. What is your point?
my point was the same point that the poster made about love and empathy
No, that was in response to someone claiming that love and empathy are supernatural. You are the only one who brought up faith. Again, what was your intended point?
To add to the conversation.
Non-sequitur does not add to the conversation, it is exactly the opposite.
We're adding to it, lol...but those were vague definitions that make even God exist. The original "emotion/understanding" poster, responded to someone who gave God the definition of love, basically told them, their God exists.
I'll try a different definition of God.
An infinite, all-powerful good.
Really? Then how do we explain all the $h!t in the world?
really? new to internet religious debates? lol...free will
but perhaps you didn't have the will to ignore....hmmm
and this is getting off topic
You're not trying to make your point and then stop the discussion there, are you?
Do you believe in heaven? Is there free will in heaven? If so then it is possible for god to create a world with free will and no suffering/evil, so that argument is defeated.
lol...me again, and actually I'm a believer in life is a paradox, so I'm not happy with my thought process' unless I find the paradox.
I do not understand your response or how it relates to the posts it follows. Respectfully requesting explanation.
The previous poster pointed out the free will paradox. If you don't understand, look it up, it is older than the greeks.
Yes I know about that. Not what I asked. The paradox is whether or not free will exists - for this discussion I will grant that it does. I asked if, in your belief system, it exists in heaven.
IDK, I've never been there, why do you want to know?
It is not something I've really thought about or care to think about. Sorry.
If you read my post that you replied to, you’d know why I want to know and why I ask.
Would you like to do that and then respond?
and I gave you my answer. What else did you need to know?
You answer is a non answer. Thats fine, you can bow out . I would also.
I don't think you understand. I know free will is an illusion, why would I want to entertain some inane debate on it.
It's much like Einstein's quote "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." except that for free will, I'd say, Free Will is merely an illusion albeit a very important one. No need to let killers know they played no role in their crimes. We need it in order to keep a functioning society.
Free will is an illusion
This is why I don't like philosophers. Everything can be argued from different perspectives without ever agreeing on a final conclusion. At least with science, if you make a claim, you have to back it up with experimentation and data.
Yes, philosophy is a much more difficult discipline than science.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
