Blaming the chaff for being chaff

[ok doser]

If you say so. :idunno:

 

[way 2 go]

I see. So I guess what I'm asking is, what makes one person remain spiritually dead and another not make this mistake?

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
Joh 3:21 But he who practices truth comes to the Light so that his works may be revealed, that they exist, having been worked in God.

 

[Winston Smith]

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
Joh 3:21 But he who practices truth comes to the Light so that his works may be revealed, that they exist, having been worked in God.

But my question is (I don't have an argument, just a question), how are men who do evil different from men who practice truth? He who does evil must have poorer judgment than he who practices truth; or what do you think?

Thanks for replying.

 

[ok doser]

Others will have different answers, but to me it comes down to free will and willfulness

There are those who will recognize God's authority and submit to Him and there are those who will refuse to recognize God's authority

 

[genuineoriginal]

He did one thing with his thoughts (by dint of having the free will to do so) and you did something else? What could be different about you two?

You seem to be trying to make the person making the choice into a victim of external forces instead of a self-motivated agent who makes a free-will choice.

Nope. I think I said the phrase "free will choice" like 9 times. So do you have an answer or... if you don't that's fine. I don't, either.

You keep speaking as if you have an assumption that there must be important difference that causes one person to make one choice and another person to make a different choice.
I gave you my answer.
There are many things that can influence a person's choices, but there is nothing that can be said to be "the difference" that causes one person to make a good choice or one person to make a bad choice.

But my question is (I don't have an argument, just a question), how are men who do evil different from men who practice truth? .

The question is hiding your argument.

He who does evil must have poorer judgment than he who practices truth;

Yes, that is the argument you keep saying you don't have.

The problem is that you are trying to find some universal cause, when there are no universal causes.
There are many different things that can influence a person to make a bad choice, but the only thing that is universal is that free-will gives people the ability to overcome each and every one of those influences and make better choices.

 

[Winston Smith]

​

You keep speaking as if you have an assumption that there must be important difference that causes one person to make one choice and another person to make a different choice.
I gave you my answer.
There are many things that can influence a person's choices, but there is nothing that can be said to be "the difference" that causes one person to make a good choice or one person to make a bad choice.

The question is hiding your argument.

Yes, that is the argument you keep saying you don't have.

The problem is that you are trying to find some universal cause, when there are no universal causes.
There are many different things that can influence a person to make a bad choice, but the only thing that is universal is that free-will gives people the ability to overcome each and every one of those influences and make better choices.

Nope. Perusing this website it looks like people come here to be adversarial, to be snappy, snarky, catty, paranoid, and above all, to wax supremely insufferable arrogance. And I see no intelligence to back that up; just attempts and sounding very smart, masterful, like you have the ability to read minds (you know me better than I know myself, gosh!). You seem to be so addicted to people being adversarial that no matter how hard I try, you expect it (or want/need/prefer) from me and treat anything I post accordingly. But it's what we always see with fundamentalists; they must engage in a game of being more condescending than thou. It's as though you feel more deeply hurt by people being condescending, or perceive it when it's not there, so you must give as well as you take and dole out condescension at every opportunity.

Are you adults? Is this site a serious endeavor? Yet no matter who comes along, you feel the need to be *internet* about it. And that's what one sees perusing the forum, people being gossipy, taking pot shots, attempting to come up with the best cut down. This place is an addiction for you I shouldn't wonder.

Right now you're working on a retort contrived to be withering, short, which seems to cleverly sum up my post here and myself entirely; no reflection, just self satisfaction, ego protection. If I'm being internet about it; it would be easy to say that this site seems to be a place for the fatuous, for dummies to pretend like they belong to a class of people that Bob Enyart belongs to - people who are Gods of debate and argumentation.

Nope.

 

[JudgeRightly]

...it would be easy to say that this site seems to be a place for the fatuous, for dummies to pretend like they belong to a class of people that Bob Enyart belongs to - people who are Gods of debate and argumentation.

In other words, you're just here to troll?

In that case...

:nuke:

 

[JudgeRightly]

Closing the thread.