BORG = RELIGION

1. Christianity (and its branched cults) is literally one of the only religions that claim that you are granted freedom once you are saved.
2. That's a strawman fallacy; Christianity doesn't grant you free will–you already have that. A Christian is freed from the enslavement sin had on him, for he then receives the better option, which is becoming a slave of God (and no, you can't not be a slave, you are either a slave to sin or to God, for this is a different kind of slavery).

The freedom from sin or the freedom of being a slave of sin is not a problem for many people as it doesn't cause them any ill effects or suffering. Granted there are those that need guidance but it doesn't mean we all have to bend a knee to a narrative that if not surrendered to will result in excommunication. The reason excommunication is a thing is because they are afraid of corruption.
It wasn't Christianity that granted us "free will" it was God in the Garden of Eden and then he planted "the Tree of Knowledge" and said don't eat its fruit. That's like a politician giving a benefit, hiding documents and saying don't worry about the details, you don't need to know.

Tell me, my intelligent friend, do you think that a person should be punished if they do something wrong?

That is subjective! Because what is wrong for one, can be right for another!

Ah, so there is no fixed moral code. Adolf Hitler was not wrong when he executed his "final solution." Joseph Stalin was not wrong when he starved out the Ukrainians. Murderers are not wrong when they brutally kill a man. That's fun.

It doesn't matter what I think, it matters what they thought when they did what they did. Do you think Adolf Hitler thought he was was wrong? Do you think Joseph Stalin thought he was wrong? They knew what they were doing, and they knew if they were not careful they could be judged and executed. Right or wrong they acted like gods and were willing to accept their fates.

What if, while God is alive, morality is not just based on physical health? Then everybody alive is a slave to sin.

It's a strawman fallacy if you use manipulative words like you just did lmao
You replaced free will with freedom
Rather, free will already exists and Christ sets you FREE from sin

What the heck? The strawman fallacy is when you misinterpret someone's argument in order to make your own argument more convincing.
Inteligento misinterpreted what Christians mean when they say that a person is set free. He thought it was free will when in reality Christianity never claims that, it claims freedom from sin.

Yeah thats it

This kind of thing can happen in the Bible.
James, for example, says, "faith without works is dead", to which people are saying, "well, he's saying that we are saved by works." He never said that!

Here's the comparison between your accusation and my defense:
My defence: You're telling ME what I mean,
Your attack: I'm also telling HIM what that other guy means

The fallacious thinking that you've found is not really fallicious.

{You think, you heard, what you thought, I said. But you must realise, what you understood, isn't what I meant!}

[OK, now we are getting somewhere!
Who are you to tell anyone what the expressions are of any character in the Bible let alone a god!
You do not have the same knowledge as any of them may have had!]

Yes, we are inferring what people mean in the Bible when they say this.
Your argument doesn't really have much of a base.
What happened between us is that I made an expression and you then misinterpreted it.

(The reason Christians are against Shariah law is because it calls for things that they cannot agree with, like marrying multiple women at the same time and intense Muslim focus.The Bible calls some things in the Quran ridiculous, so how can a Christian accept Muslim law? The Bible also says that homosexuality is evil, so how can they support that either? They can respect other people who are in sin, but that doesn’t mean they can’t disagree with them too.If I was king, I would strongly discourage homosexuality. I don’t think I would completely illegallize it but I would discourage it.)

(You do realise that the existence of gay people is a product of heterosexual activity. Gay people don't make babies without help from the opposite sex!)

(Yes, I am quite aware of that fact. But what does that got to do with the price of corn in Ohio?)

(If all the corn in Ohio was gay it wouldn't regenerate. So by their nature gay people are a dying demographic, its like the Darwin Awards in slow motion!)

If you didn't misinterpret it, I wouldn't have a problem with you interpreting my expression because you'd be interpreting correctly.
I have a problem because I'm saying this, and you're telling me, "no, you're actually saying this..."

{The price of corn in Ohio is a non sequitur, but in terms of homosexuality corn that can't procreate dies off and the same can be said for humans! So I don't think I misinterpreted anything. If the Bible says homosexuality is evil it can only be so if there is another mitigating issue, of which I have not been made aware of. What makes it evil?}

The price of corn in Ohio is a red herring, specifically. I said it as an expression claiming that your argument was the red herring fallacy.

If you are not a Christian like me, I don't think you have much reason to think that that homosexuality is evil, just that it may become a problem if everybody was homosexual and no one was having babies. If you are a Christian, homosexuality is evil because God created us to naturally be with the opposite sex, and denying that is denying God's given nature to us, as spoken in the Bible.

I hope this clears things up because I'm calling it quits on any further comments on this string.
(reference) {response}
Now that's reasonable reasoning.
However, that's like saying that God is at fault for creating animals that can't reason at all, because they're not perfect like he is.
{No not really, if God exists then God is at fault for creating animals, if they can reason is debatable, but we could argue he wanted them that way.}

Giving humans the ability to reason is not a mistake.
{It may be a mistake, I wouldn't know and I don't know how you would}

I can make a little minifigure of me on purpose. But that little minifigure will never be as good as me.
{Give it time we are only at the cloning stage right now.}

God also (at least according to Christianity) made humans good, and they are good, but then came the fall.
{If God considers himself good then those made in his image he would also consider to be good. I would guess}

For your rebuttal of my ask for proof that God is bound by the metaphysical, I don't think you're understanding the argument.
Originally, you claimed that God could be bound by the metaphysical if it exists.
So I responded claiming that God doesn't necessarily need to be bound by the metaphysical if it exists.
Your response is more of a misinterpretation of my counterclaim (and perhaps my counterclaim may be a misinterpretation of your claim).
{I can't believe the metaphysical and/or God exists, because I have not been introduced to any evidence I consider to be reliable. Therefore I lump them together as dependent on each other. Whether they are or not I have no way of knowing. }

It also ignores the rest of my claim, that the universe must be bound by space and time.
{If you look at how we measure time you will come to realise there is no measurement of time without movement of some sort of object or partical, and therefore time is bound to space (distance) and movement (energy).}

I guess your comment series is done, so I guess that means this will be my last response on this string.
"quote"

"if God exists then God is at fault for creating animals..."
Yes. God is responsible for creating animals. I'm saying it's ridiculous to claim that he made a mistake by doing so.

"It may be a mistake, I wouldn't know and I don't know how you would"
It may be true that we can't know anything to be 100% sure, but I am inclined to believe that a perfect God can't make mistakes (because he's perfect), and therefore we are not a mistake. Remember, you were trying to prove that it's highly likely for us to have been a mistake if God created us, you were not trying to prove that it's possible that we were a mistake. We already agree on that.

"Give it time we are only at the cloning stage right now."
That doesn't really engage my point, given that I was claiming that I could have purposefully made something not as great as me without making a mistake in doing so.

"[I don't know if the metaphysical and/or God exist, so I consider them to be dependent on each other] Whether they are or not I have no way of knowing."
So what were we even arguing about?

"If you look at how we measure time you will come to realise there is no measurement of time without movement of some sort of object or [particle], and therefore time is bound to space (distance) and movement (energy)."
Well, I've always looked at it as everything is bound by time, not the other way around, for a rock could not have moved if it had no time to do so. You could have time moving without objects moving, but you can't have objects moving without time moving, and therefore the universe is bound by time (and space). Anyway, that still doesn't really address the problem.

Flick7
RE: "It's a strawman fallacy if you use manipulative words like you just did lmao
You replaced free will with freedom Rather, free will already exists and Christ sets you FREE from sin"

Which strawman fallacy are you talking about?

Re: "1. Christianity (and its branched cults) is literally one of the only religions that claim that you are granted freedom once you are saved."

Did you change the general term "RELIGION" to the specific term "Christianity"?

Re: "2. That's a strawman fallacy"

I did not imply "free will" was granted by religion or Christianity!

Re: "becoming a slave of God"

Why does one have to be a slave to anything? Morality and sin are constructs, meaning you wouldn't know them unless someone proposed them.

Re: "for this is a different kind of slavery"

How many kinds are there?
Also you are "not a slave" if you are exercising your "free will" to conform to a religion, that is surrender or submission to be ruled over by others! And that is assimilation!

"Did you change the general term "RELIGION" to the specific term "Christianity"?"
Yes, yes I did, because outright, none of the other religions claim you are being set free. It's just Christianity.

"I did not imply "free will" was granted by religion or Christianity!"
Yes, you did, that was the whole point of the meme, was it not?

"Why does one have to be a slave to anything?"
I don't know, there's good and there's evil. If you do not side with the good, then evil will come and snatch you up. If you are not good, you are evil, and you are, in that sense, a "slave" to both.