Will Humans Have Freewill in Heaven?

[TubbyTubby]

I don't recognise that question as qualifying as anything that comes close to one worthy of an answer, and I don't see the relevance to what I wrote previously.

Of coarse you don't, denial is your best weapon, pitiful but true.

You're the pitiful one, the spelling you want is 'of course'. Home schooling eh? Wonderful stuff.

[Godscreated]

Of coarse you don't, denial is your best weapon, pitiful but true.

You're the pitiful one, the spelling you want is 'of course'. Home schooling eh? Wonderful stuff.

Yep,miss used, and you see what I mean by pitiful when my grammar is your only argument, of course you don't, pitiful.

GC

[TubbyTubby]

You're the pitiful one, the spelling you want is 'of course'. Home schooling eh? Wonderful stuff.

Yep,miss used, and you see what I mean by pitiful when my grammar is your only argument, of course you don't, pitiful.

GC

Not really, the last time I asked something you replied with scripture that mentioned drowning me with a millstone round ny neck so I just decided to point out your poor spelling - it seemed just as (ir)relevant.

It seems to be a common trait with christians. The christianforumsite doesn't appear to have one single person that can spell correctly and most of them are borderline illiterate. I was simply wondering if it was a product of home schooling? You know, an illiterate parent teaching their children how to spell.

[Crossless2.0]

Your utter lack of understanding of how science works is well documented on these boards, so there's no need to deal with your drivel about science doing away with "God".  You don't get the scientific method.  We know.

As for the rest, give me specific, documented examples (not something one of your fellow yokels at church mentioned over coffee) of public schools telling students "there's no need for God" or that God is taught as non-existent.  Under the Constitution, public schools are to be neutral on such questions, and properly so.

No real understanding of your type of science, you're correct. The falsification of the Piltdown Skull is just one example, it was taught in schools for years, yes a hoax taught to impressionistic minds for what. To try and further a false cause to indoctrinate children.
I've several friends that are or have been teachers and they have related what happens in schools from grade school through high school.

GC

"My" type of science?  If I didn't know better, I'd think you're putting me on.  Sadly, in your case, I know better. 

As regards the Piltdown skull, please remind me again which creationist exposed the hoax?  Oh, right -- that's not how it happened.  It was accomplished by scientists pursuing "my" type of science -- you know, evidence-based and subject to falsification.  The same type of science that has utterly and for all time falsified your fundamentalist reading of Genesis.

And what part of "specific, documented examples" eludes your bowling ball sharp understanding?  Claiming and demonstrating are different things.  I know you don't understand that, but try.  Try hard.

[Godscreated]

"My" type of science?  If I didn't know better, I'd think you're putting me on.  Sadly, in your case, I know better. 

As regards the Piltdown skull, please remind me again which creationist exposed the hoax?  Oh, right -- that's not how it happened.  It was accomplished by scientists pursuing "my" type of science -- you know, evidence-based and subject to falsification.  The same type of science that has utterly and for all time falsified your fundamentalist reading of Genesis.

And what part of "specific, documented examples" eludes your bowling ball sharp understanding?  Claiming and demonstrating are different things.  I know you don't understand that, but try.  Try hard.

Yes they are one and the same, it doesn't matter who discovered the hoax, it was taught as fact in schools for many years, so why should we trust those who would deceive our children to advance their idea of the world by deception.

GC

[Godscreated]

Yep,miss used, and you see what I mean by pitiful when my grammar is your only argument, of course you don't, pitiful.

GC

Not really, the last time I asked something you replied with scripture that mentioned drowning me with a millstone round ny neck so I just decided to point out your poor spelling - it seemed just as (ir)relevant.

It seems to be a common trait with christians. The christianforumsite doesn't appear to have one single person that can spell correctly and most of them are borderline illiterate. I was simply wondering if it was a product of home schooling? You know, an illiterate parent teaching their children how to spell.

I have friends who were home schooled until they entered high school and were valedictorians of their graduating classes. I did not suggest you should drown yourself nor does the Bible, the scripture says that your punishment in eternity would be less if you did, it was emphasizing how much Christ cares for these little ones. 

GC

[Crossless2.0]

"My" type of science?  If I didn't know better, I'd think you're putting me on.  Sadly, in your case, I know better. 

As regards the Piltdown skull, please remind me again which creationist exposed the hoax?  Oh, right -- that's not how it happened.  It was accomplished by scientists pursuing "my" type of science -- you know, evidence-based and subject to falsification.  The same type of science that has utterly and for all time falsified your fundamentalist reading of Genesis.

And what part of "specific, documented examples" eludes your bowling ball sharp understanding?  Claiming and demonstrating are different things.  I know you don't understand that, but try.  Try hard.

Yes they are one and the same, it doesn't matter who discovered the hoax, it was taught as fact in schools for many years, so why should we trust those who would deceive our children to advance their idea of the world by deception.

GC

So errors that were taught become, in your view, evidence of a conspiracy and propaganda?  Please demonstrate that the errors weren't taught in good faith.

[TubbyTubby]

Not really, the last time I asked something you replied with scripture that mentioned drowning me with a millstone round ny neck so I just decided to point out your poor spelling - it seemed just as (ir)relevant.

It seems to be a common trait with christians. The christianforumsite doesn't appear to have one single person that can spell correctly and most of them are borderline illiterate. I was simply wondering if it was a product of home schooling? You know, an illiterate parent teaching their children how to spell.

I have friends who were home schooled until they entered high school and were valedictorians of their graduating classes. I did not suggest you should drown yourself nor does the Bible, the scripture says that your punishment in eternity would be less if you did, it was emphasizing how much Christ cares for these little ones. 

GC

I'm very pleased for your friends, as for the scripture perhaps I was taking it too literally or perhaps I picked the wrong translation. How stupid of me.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
“And everyone who commits an offense against one of these little ones who believe in me, it were profitable for him that a donkey's millstone would be hung around his neck and he be sunk in the depths of the sea.”

GOD'S WORD[REGISTERED SIGN] Translation
"These little ones believe in me. It would be best for the person who causes one of them to lose faith to be drowned in the sea with a large stone hung around his neck.

The Aramaic to English translation at least is a bit more specific in that it would be better to use a donkeys millstone to drown me. It's not literal I suppose so I can have confidence that nobody has suffered that fate yet.

[KevinM1]

"My" type of science?  If I didn't know better, I'd think you're putting me on.  Sadly, in your case, I know better. 

As regards the Piltdown skull, please remind me again which creationist exposed the hoax?  Oh, right -- that's not how it happened.  It was accomplished by scientists pursuing "my" type of science -- you know, evidence-based and subject to falsification.  The same type of science that has utterly and for all time falsified your fundamentalist reading of Genesis.

And what part of "specific, documented examples" eludes your bowling ball sharp understanding?  Claiming and demonstrating are different things.  I know you don't understand that, but try.  Try hard.

Yes they are one and the same, it doesn't matter who discovered the hoax, it was taught as fact in schools for many years, so why should we trust those who would deceive our children to advance their idea of the world by deception.

GC

The entire point is that:

1. Science is about presenting the best possible answer to the evidence in front of us.
2. Science is, inherently, self-correcting.

Do some people try to deceive others?  Sure.  Science isn't fool proof.  No one here has ever claimed that.  The thing is, science, which is a process, naturally weeds out bad answers and/or evidence if done properly (meaning, that they actually follow the scientific method with honesty).  That such deceptions are caught are a testament to how the process works.  

Want a more recent example?  Look at the guy who put forth that famous bogus study about vaccinations causing autism.  Because science is peer-reviewed, other scientists looked at his study.  Over time, it became clear that he either ran a poorly designed study, or cooked the books.  After a host of other scientists lambasted him for his study, he admitted it was a fraud.  Yeah, it took some time.  Science, again, is a process.  Refutations and corrections don't happen in the blink of an eye.  But, it was, ultimately, corrected.

You're really overstating the case of deception.  The vast, vast majority of scientists are honest.  Science is based on honesty and openness.  The results are always up for peer review, which often means other scientists repeating the experiment.  Because the results are subjected to such rigorous review, the vast majority of scientists aren't going to attempt to lie or deceive.  And those that are foolish enough to try are caught.  Maybe not immediately, but they're still caught.

So, why should we trust them?  Because they're the best we have.

[Metis]

Yes they are one and the same, it doesn't matter who discovered the hoax, it was taught as fact in schools for many years, so why should we trust those who would deceive our children to advance their idea of the world by deception.

GC

Indeed, it was a mistake, but here is the core difference.

When a secular establishment discovers a mistake it readjusts itself accordingly and we all benefit from now knowing what is most likely to be true.

When a fundamentalist establishment finds out it makes a mistake it lies, blackmails, shrieks hysterically and refuses to move an inch.

Why should we not trust those who pursue truth if not more than any less than those who don't care if what they teach is true or not?