Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

How can it be free will if God answers your prayers.

And if he doesn't, which he doesn't, why bother praying?

JIA, what the hell?

I think you've left out some all of the steps here. Prayer would be initiated out of one's own free will, in order to connect with God. God then acknowledges (or not) the prayer, again out of hir own free will. The result of the prayer (material or psychic income) is then distributed throughout the human's life, again at the discretion of free will.

What's wrong?

The only person listening while you pray is yourself. Fortunately, it turns out that the only person who can do anything about your prays is also yourself. Therefore, if there is something you are praying for, then get off your butt and do something about it.

I don't see the problem.

A more relevant question is when people say "I pray god opens your eyes", is that not removing your free will?

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't see the problem.

A more relevant question is when people say "I pray god opens your eyes", is that not removing your free will?

Only if God directly alters your mind.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Only if God directly alters your mind.
That seems to be the implication.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't see the problem.

A more relevant question is when people say "I pray god opens your eyes", is that not removing your free will?

Giving someone more understanding wouldn't be altering free will, from a human's perspective. Also, considering that the "child" came to the "father" of his or her on volition, seeking a specific results or council, it is wholly free-will and the result is still the exercise of the "pray-er's" free will.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Giving someone more understanding wouldn't be altering free will, from a human's perspective. Also, considering that the "child" came to the "father" of his or her on volition, seeking a specific results or council, it is wholly free-will and the result is still the exercise of the "pray-er's" free will.
That seems like semantics. It wasn't your action that made you realize god, it was god's.

Originally posted by King Kandy
That seems like semantics. It wasn't your action that made you realize god, it was god's.

I don't understand your second point there.

I thought the whole point of having free will was that you could choose to follow god or not (and are thus responsible and can be punished for your sins). If God just reaches into your mind and "makes you see the light", you are essentially being forced to believe in him.

Originally posted by lord xyz
JIA, what the hell?

Trying to confront him directly with a supposed contradiction won't work. It's unlikely you'll get a straight answer, and even less likely that it will elicit anything productive in discussion.

Not that I mind the intent of questioning another's beliefs in a civil manner. It's a fair purpose, although your tone suggests something a bit less than civil. But I can't see anything good coming of it.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I thought the whole point of having free will was that you could choose to follow god or not (and are thus responsible and can be punished for your sins). If God just reaches into your mind and "makes you see the light", you are essentially being forced to believe in him.

Not really. You get the option to do with that information as you will.

God supposedly told Mormons to not go into debt for anything other than education and a home...yet, millions of Mormons are in debt for things other than those items...despite God's "enlightenment."


I'm sure there are trillion and one things like that.

But if the info god provided was insufficient to cause you to convert, then he did not fulfill the prayer to "bring you to the light" so to speak. If he had accomplished the task, then it would infringe on your free will to discover god on your own.

Let's simplify it. What if someone prayed to God to "make someone a good christian"?

Originally posted by King Kandy
But if the info god provided was insufficient to cause you to convert, then he did not fulfill the prayer to "bring you to the light" so to speak. If he had accomplished the task, then it would infringe on your free will to discover god on your own.

Showing someone the "light" isn't always listened to, though. Think about how many times you've had an argument with thick-headed idiots.

It's much worse for God.

God can answer a prayer, but it is still up to the individual to act on those "answers." Receiving knowledge is all it is. Nothing more. It's not as though you say one prayer and, boom, you've reached nirvana.

To use the old worn out saying, you can take a horse to water...




Originally posted by King Kandy
Let's simplify it. What if someone prayed to God to "make someone a good christian"?

Simple. God wouldn't do anything and may not even answer the prayer.

However, if a person asked, "what can I do to help John through his hardship?" An answer might be listening to him sincerely, doing acts of service for him, or even asking to pray with him in his home. Not once did Jesus force his message on anyone. If you see a Christian trying to shove the gospel down someone's throat, they are definitely NOT being Christ-like and they shame the God they profess to follow. First example I can think of: all the gay hate I see in Oklahoma from "Christians."

Which do you think is the more loving and "Christ-like" prayer: the one that asks God to destroy a person's free will, or the prayer that asks for help in bringing love and charity to someone they care about? Both are aiming for the same goal, really...but one is almost evil and the other is loving.

People shouldn't pray for God to do things, they should pray for the strength to do things themselves. We are here to become better people so we can become more like God...not to consistently rely on God for every little thing.

Here's another example: If God commanded me to move a mountain, I would go buy a shovel (unlike Moses who is like *kapow!* and he's split the Red Sea.)

Originally posted by dadudemon
People shouldn't pray for God to do things, they should pray for the strength to do things themselves...not to consistently rely on God for every little thing. "God is not your personal genie." (or something like that)

-- Doug Heffernan

Originally posted by King Kandy
But if the info god provided was insufficient to cause you to convert, then he did not fulfill the prayer to "bring you to the light" so to speak. If he had accomplished the task, then it would infringe on your free will to discover god on your own.

Let's simplify it. What if someone prayed to God to "make someone a good christian"?

considering the christian doctrine i used to follow, here are 'the answers.'

first. keep in mind that 'prayer' is a kind of meditative state for some people. would you agree that your mind might be more open to interpret 'signs' ? also, god won't do all the work for you... free will means that you can be proactive as well.

second. god does not answer a prayer by speaking into your brain directly. if that happens to be the way people experience it, then they are very most likely schizophrenic. here's where "god's mysterious ways" come into play. because god gave us free will, it would be sorta against that principle for him to write on the wall the answer. you may be inspired through your meditative prayer-state, or you may come away with a deeply unsatisfying feeling. i'm sure shaky would say that meditation isn't something you get on the first try.

three. more "god works in mysterious ways." your prayer may most likely be answered by a seemingly random act. say you're praying not to land in debt. so, you leave your prayer-state and get a call from someone who you know that is planning to sell off and they're letting you know because they know you're interested in . it might mean having to take out a loan or something, but it might turn out to be the best thing that ever happened. you might buy _____ and become very successful. or you might buy ____ and suck air trying to do it. god gives no promises, and expects you to do most of the work yourself.

finally, there's protestant work ethic. you probably already know what this is, but i'll just run through it - the harder you work, the more benefits you'll get. basically a 'you'll reap what you sow' type deal.

The idea of a God who knows the result of actions that have not yet occurred is not congruent with free will. I don't see prayer modifying this in any way, as God already knows whether he will answer your prayer before you are born.

EDIT: basically, if we are proposing the Christian god is real, as xyz would have to be for the question to be valid, we are already throwing away the concept of free will as it is understood in the Western philosophical tradition. Prayer can't give you more free will, but how can you get less than none?

Originally posted by Digi
Trying to confront him directly with a supposed contradiction won't work. It's unlikely you'll get a straight answer, and even less likely that it will elicit anything productive in discussion.

Not that I mind the intent of questioning another's beliefs in a civil manner. It's a fair purpose, although your tone suggests something a bit less than civil. But I can't see anything good coming of it. My bad.

I'm just thinking if you pray, and god helps you, where's the free will?

but if God already knows you were going to pray, what you were going to ask, whether he would answer and how that would all play out before your parents' grandparents were born, where was the free will in the first place?

Knowing something will happen I don't think is against free will.

I think it's a case of, he knows all possible outcomes, but you have the choice which one to take.

how would god answering your prayer remove any of that choice?

you are still choosing to ask God for help down your chosen path. In fact, by that definition, wouldn't not answering the prayer interfere more with free will?

also, I was using the common Western philosophical definition of free will. Technically, even with all possible choices, if God has foreknowledge of which choice you will make, it is not congruent with free will, in that tradition.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I think it's a case of, he knows all possible outcomes, but you have the choice which one to take.

Holy shit.


This is actually a very intelligent comment.







This is how I perceive it, as well. God knows all possible realities as they are one eternal now, with him.

However, all of those realities to condense into one "reality" string until the person experiences it. The actions of others and the self condense these realities in the one "string."

This thinks of it as a linear construct based on time. I don't have a good theory as to how God is outside of our time and can see some realities disappearing from his "hand" as his children make their decisions.

I hate to say that God works in mysterious ways, but, I still haven't thought of how the realities condense into one string reality, while God is still aware of all possible realities, but not aware of the specific path that we take. There has to be some sort of resolution, chronologically, that accounts for this linear progression, while also preserving God's "outside of our time" perception. I think that if his perception was at the 7th dimensional level, He can accomplish that, but, our "time" is "one eternal now" to his perception........meaning our realities have already panned out and coalesced into one string for God, exit in their expanded forms, and are in the process of condensing, all at an infinity small instance. That means God would be aware of the outcome of each lives' string, right?



So, how to we account for him not know what our string is until it's happened in our reality? Someone help me bridge the gap...as I may have talked myself into confusion.

Originally posted by inimalist
how would god answering your prayer remove any of that choice?

you are still choosing to ask God for help down your chosen path. In fact, by that definition, wouldn't not answering the prayer interfere more with free will?

also, I was using the common Western philosophical definition of free will. Technically, even with all possible choices, if God has foreknowledge of which choice you will make, it is not congruent with free will, in that tradition. My point is, if God helps you, where is the free will?

Free will, my understanding, is complete absence of God. God does not interfere or control your life. So when you pray for a promotion, and get one, is that earning a promotion by yourself? Or is it God playing favourites? How can it be free will if you're being helped by a supernatural being?

Originally posted by lord xyz
My point is, if God helps you, where is the free will?

Free will, my understanding, is complete absence of God. God does not interfere or control your life. So when you pray for a promotion, and get one, is that earning a promotion by yourself? Or is it God playing favourites? How can it be free will if you're being helped by a supernatural being? This does not even make sense.

Unless "God" forces these things than it can be understandable.

But you first initiated a prayer (on your own free will) how does god helping that person in anyway affect someone's free will? Especially since that person initiated the whole ordeal.

So when you ask your well connected father-in-law for a promotion, and get one, is that earning a promotion by yourself? Or is it a higher up playing favorites? How can it be free will if you're being helped by a supernatural well-connected human being?


How is this any different?

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
So when you ask your well connected father-in-law for a promotion, and get one, is that earning a promotion by yourself? Or is it a higher up playing favorites? How can it be free will if you're being helped by a supernatural well-connected human being?


How is this any different?

that may be an issue of earning or merit, but not of free will

this is close to saying going to the doctor when you are sick is a violation of free will.

Free will?

Definition : the apparent human ability to make choices that are not externally determined.

The problem I see with free will is that it does not exist. Any choice you make is dependent on external circumstances. Should I have a piece of cake or not is dependent on rather there is cake available in the first place.

Let us examine the idea in a more abstract way. We have the choice to do right or wrong. However, right and wrong are dependent on external circumstances. For example steeling is wrong, unless you are starving to death and you steel food to eat. So, the choice to do right is based your circumstances at the time.

Therefore, we do not have free will to begin with. This makes the question of this thread moot.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The only person listening while you pray is yourself. Fortunately, it turns out that the only person who can do anything about your prays is also yourself. Therefore, if there is something you are praying for, then get off your butt and do something about it.

Wow... this is new... I equally agree and disagree with this statement... but, really the disagreement only comes down to religious differences. I mean I believe that there is a God listening... somewhere, but to me prayer isn't a magic wand to get God to do what you want.

In most cases, for example if you prayed for the knowledge to pass an exam God's answer would be more of a, ok, your book is right behind you, get to studying you already have what you need.

But, once again that comes down to religious differences. I do believe that the most that comes out of prayers such as that is a nudge in the correct direction. Personally, I view prayer as a connection to God in hopes of coming to more understand God. But, like I said, that's my own religious viewes, take it for what it is.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Free will?

Definition : the apparent human ability to make choices that are not externally determined.

The problem I see with free will is that it does not exist. Any choice you make is dependent on external circumstances. Should I have a piece of cake or not is dependent on rather there is cake available in the first place.

Let us examine the idea in a more abstract way. We have the choice to do right or wrong. However, right and wrong are dependent on external circumstances. For example steeling is wrong, unless you are starving to death and you steel food to eat. So, the choice to do right is based your circumstances at the time.

Therefore, we do not have free will to begin with. This makes the question of this thread moot.

Meh, not entirely. Yes our choices are impacted by external factors, but not always determined by external factors. For example, Right now I have the choice of posting a message or not, obviously I chose, by my own free will, to post this message, but I could have just as easily done one of a number of things:

turned off my Lap Top and gone to bed
gone to a different site
turned the Lap Top off and read a book
turned the Lap Top off and started playing a Video Game
etc...etc... (and in any of those instances of turning the lap top off, I could just leave it on instead)

Rarely do you ever have only one choice, though our desires may make it seem as if it was limited to one choice, for example:

You have a gun pressed to your head and the gunner is going to shoot you if you don't tell him everything you know about... ah, hell, KMC (let's make this utterly rediculous) and you don't want to die. Oh, and you are bound so there is no hope of escape. Now to fullfil you desire to continue living your only choice is to tell the gunner everything you know about KMC, but in reality you have atleast 2 choices (1) let the guy kill you or (2) tell him everything you know... and I just thought of choice (3) tell him alittle and try to decieve him into believing that is all you know.

Same with your example of the starving man (1) he could steal some food (2) he could scavenge left-overs from garbage (3) he could try to kill an animal and eat it (4) he could starve to death. Granted #4 is not much of a choice, but it is a choice. (5) he could kill a person and eat them. (Grotesque and usually unthinkable choice, but still existant.)

Free Will exists, because in almost every situation there is more than one choice, what usually limits choice for us is our own desires and beliefs, but just because something is against our desires or beliefs doesn't make it any less of a choice, because we still have the ability to choose that path.

Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
...Free Will exists, because in almost every situation there is more than one choice, what usually limits choice for us is our own desires and beliefs, but just because something is against our desires or beliefs doesn't make it any less of a choice, because we still have the ability to choose that path.

The number of choices to a situation does not matter. The fact that your choices are limited by external forces shows that you do not have free will. You have limited will. There is always something you cannot do, be it flying to the moon under your own power, or live forever.

If you had free will, you could do anything at any time.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The number of choices to a situation does not matter. The fact that your choices are limited by external forces shows that you do not have free will. You have limited will. There is always something you cannot do, be it flying to the moon under your own power, or live forever.

If you had free will, you could do anything at any time.

I'd like to see if you can find a single other person that holds that definition of "free will".

wouldn't it imply that someone who is confined to a wheel chair has less free will than someone who doesn't?

In this case, a building putting in handicapped access ramps would be seen as violating free will in the same way answering prayers would be...

I'm with sym on this, I think you guys have misinterpreted what is traditionally meant by "free will", ie, the ability to control your actions and the outcome of your behaviour.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'd like to see if you can find a single other person that holds that definition of "free will".

So, popularity is of important to you?

Originally posted by inimalist
wouldn't it imply that someone who is confined to a wheel chair has less free will than someone who doesn't?

In this case, a building putting in handicapped access ramps would be seen as violating free will in the same way answering prayers would be...

I'm with sym on this, I think you guys have misinterpreted what is traditionally meant by "free will", ie, the ability to control your actions and the outcome of your behaviour.

I am taking the words free will literally. I am hoping to show how interpretation is a key factor in trying to understand what is written in the bible.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, popularity is of important to you?

In conversation meaning must be agreed upon and mutually understood if it is not then communication is inherently impossible. You have picked a new (and stupid) meaning for free will and apparently expect other people to accept it. This creates completely needless confusion that you use to obfuscate your own limitations.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
In conversation meaning must be agreed upon and mutually understood if it is not then communication is inherently impossible. You have picked a new (and stupid) meaning for free will and apparently expect other people to accept it. This creates completely needless confusion that you use to obfuscate your own limitations.

And so it goes with interpreting the bible. That is why there are so many denominations in Christianity.

There are many things in the bible that are stupid, and most of them are that way because of people picking meanings.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And so it goes with interpreting the bible. That is why there are so many denominations in Christianity.

There are many things in the bible that are stupid, and most of them are that way because of people picking meanings.

Which is exactly why you have to explain personal (crazy) definitions of words to other people before beginning a debate.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Which is exactly why you have to explain personal (crazy) definitions of words to other people before beginning a debate.

But I wasn't having a debate with you.

Do you consider a literal interpretation of the bible to be crazy?

Do you think it is uncommon for people to a literal interpretation of the bible?

Do you think the thread starter was using a literal interpretation of the bible?

Originally posted by lord xyz
How can it be free will if God answers your prayers.

And if he doesn't, which he doesn't, why bother praying?

JIA, what the hell? i don't think god gives a crap about free will. I think that's an American term.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The only person listening while you pray is yourself. Fortunately, it turns out that the only person who can do anything about your prays is also yourself. Therefore, if there is something you are praying for, then get off your butt and do something about it.
sometimes you do everything you can,but most of the things are not in your hands.what to do thenboat

Originally posted by maham
sometimes you do everything you can,but most of the things are not in your hands.what to do thenboat

Take responsibility for your life. It can be difficult to distinguish between what is your responsibility and what is not your responsibility, but generally taking responsibility for your life and were you are right now is a good start.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, popularity is of important to you?



I am taking the words free will literally. I am hoping to show how interpretation is a key factor in trying to understand what is written in the bible.

True, but the same goes for nearly everything else, people interperate everything to fit into their view of the world... It's kind of unfortunate actually...

Originally posted by Mandrag Ganon
True, but the same goes for nearly everything else, people interperate everything to fit into their view of the world... It's kind of unfortunate actually...

Then we have to admit that at some point we cannot know. That leads to what works and what does not work. That means if prayer works for you, then you should pray. If it doesn't, then do something else. That way prayer does not interfere with free will because their relationship becomes meaningless.

Originally posted by lord xyz
How can it be free will if God answers your prayers?

lol Is this a serious question? It's kind of silly.

It's rather slippery for you to assume that God does not answer prayer! As ridiculous as it may seem, you have zero proof. Second, God answers prayer according to His will, not ours. Scripture plainly states that notion. God is not a genie in a bottle. Such makes perfect sense if God's knowledge surpasses human intellect. And lastly, Christians pray for wisdom/understanding entailing life experience(s), not monetary reward and/or free handouts! With all in mind, freewill is not compromised. My question to you: have you every studied Holy Scripture in open fashion, or do you merely nit-pick to serve your own self-imposed views (based on emotion)? It's just an honest question.

Originally posted by ushomefree
It's rather slippery for you to assume that God does not answer prayer! As ridiculous as it may seem, you have zero proof. Second, God answers prayer according to His will, not ours. Scripture plainly states that notion. God is not a genie in a bottle. Such makes perfect sense if God's knowledge surpasses human intellect. And lastly, Christians pray for wisdom/understanding entailing life experience(s), not monetary reward and/or free handouts! With all in mind, freewill is not compromised. My question to you: have you every studied Holy Scripture in open fashion, or do you merely nit-pick to serve your own self-imposed views (based on emotion)? It's just an honest question.


Sure, lord xyz may not have any proof that a god does not answer a prayer, but neither do you have any proof to the contrary. There is no way to prove that a god answers a prayer, because prayer is all in the mind of the person praying.

Originally posted by lord xyz
How can it be free will if God answers your prayers.

And if he doesn't, which he doesn't, why bother praying?

JIA, what the hell?


I watch the JLA, not JIA..sorry. Anyway, praying(much like meditation) is a way of calming and relaxing one's nerves. Unfortunately, sometimes praying doesn't necessarily give us the response we want..and that's when we have to move forward and do what we know is right. Now the problem is, what is right? It depends on the given situation. Do you know what love is? Once you know the answer to the question, then you'll know why God doesn't respond to your prayers.

Matthew

Originally posted by lord xyz
My point is, if God helps you, where is the free will?

Free will, my understanding, is complete absence of God. God does not interfere or control your life. So when you pray for a promotion, and get one, is that earning a promotion by yourself? Or is it God playing favourites? How can it be free will if you're being helped by a supernatural being?


Phenominal case of contradictory. If you are asking for God's help then you are asking him on your own free will; are you not? Bassically why on Earth would you ask him something if you believed it was againt your will?

I have yet to have the concept of Christian free will logically explained to me, despite having been Christian most of my life. Apparently it's non-deterministic, which doesn't make any sense at all to me. So I'd join in the discussion, but I'm not sure I can grasp the underlying concept first. Because imo it's not prayer that interferes with free will, it's....well...the universe.

shrug

Christian free will is similar to Kantian thought. To explain, Kant says this in Critique of Pure Reason:

"A person's will is thought of, in terms of its appearance in visible actions, as necessarily subjects to the law of Nature. i.e the principle of causality. i.e determinism and this as not being free."

"The very same wil is thought of as belonging to a thing in itself (namely that person's soul considered as a thing in itself.) as not subject to the law of Nature and thus as being free."

Christians believe that the soul is free (at least in my experience) and that it is what gives us free will.

It's fairly shaky ground though since it depends on human beings having a non materialistic soul (not say an Arisotlean soul), which can't be proven.

Thanks. That's as coherent an explanation as I've seen.

Originally posted by Autokrat
It's fairly shaky ground though since it depends on human beings having a non materialistic soul (not say an Arisotlean soul), which can't be proven.

True. And it also defies causality. Even if a soul is non-materialistic, it's impossible (for me at least) to conceive of something that acts outside of some kind of causal system. To do so would require continuous reality manipulation. Which, granted, an omnipotent deity should be capable of, but to say that the whole thing seems far-fetched and lacking evidence is a vast, vast understatement.

I really just think that many Christians, and I don't mean the clergy and apologists but laypeople, don't give it a lot of thought. They want to believe in some sort of amorphic "freedom" without thinking critically enough about exactly how they're able to thwart the determinism that guides the rest of the known universe.

Of course, calling it free will also implies that the opposite of free will is some form of subjugation, which is also misleading. Philosophy abounds with freedom in deterministic systems, albeit a different kind of freedom than is explicated by Christians. But it creates a convenient gag reflex in the human psyche to equate not having free will with being a slave or somesuch, so I can see why the idea of "free" is clung to.

Originally posted by Digi
Thanks. That's as coherent an explanation as I've seen.



True. And it also defies causality. Even if a soul is non-materialistic, it's impossible (for me at least) to conceive of something that acts outside of some kind of causal system. To do so would require continuous reality manipulation. Which, granted, an omnipotent deity should be capable of, but to say that the whole thing seems far-fetched and lacking evidence is a vast, vast understatement.

I really just think that many Christians, and I don't mean the clergy and apologists but laypeople, don't give it a lot of thought. They want to believe in some sort of amorphic "freedom" without thinking critically enough about exactly how they're able to thwart the determinism that guides the rest of the known universe.

Of course, calling it free will also implies that the opposite of free will is some form of subjugation, which is also misleading. Philosophy abounds with freedom in deterministic systems, albeit a different kind of freedom than is explicated by Christians. But it creates a convenient gag reflex in the human psyche to equate not having free will with being a slave or somesuch, so I can see why the idea of "free" is clung to.

To be fair to Kant, he does have a very detailed explanation as to how the freedom of the soul works, but I am not qualified to try and explain it (I hardly understand it myself). Kant does admit that his argument presupposes the existence of god to which he provides his own argument for the existence of god.

Originally posted by Autokrat
To be fair to Kant, he does have a very detailed explanation as to how the freedom of the soul works, but I am not qualified to try and explain it (I hardly understand it myself). Kant does admit that his argument presupposes the existence of god to which he provides his own argument for the existence of god.

Right, it has to devolve into what any religious argument does: faith. And in most cases, completely blind faith based on no evidence whatsoever. If the presupposition is true, I'll grant everything else about the theory. But that's a big if, as big as an infinite number of others that are equally as unlikely.

So. Anyway. I can see how prayer doesn't interfere with free will. A few people in this thread have defended it credibly. I just don't see how free will doesn't interfere with existence.

only psychotic people have no free will

Originally posted by overlord
only psychotic people have no free will

Only psychotic people believe they have free will.

well not me, and I've been psychotic, I was really possessed

Originally posted by overlord
well not me, and I've been psychotic, I was really possessed

How can you be possessed? Demons and spirits are no more real then unicorns and the Easter Bunnies.

I got violent without a reason because I was obsessed with myself

in other words possessed, no more plan

you wanna know what, the universe is god, and our world is ruled by a female angel, she is ego

what I'm trying to rid people off by spreading confusion. x)

I'm sorry, I'm really high right now x)

Originally posted by overlord
I got violent without a reason because I was obsessed with myself

in other words possessed, no more plan

Just because you do something with no reason does not mean you are possessed. All it means it you do things without know why. This is most likely because you are too high, too often.

I can call it possessed if I like

I was not in control of myself x)

Originally posted by overlord
I can call it possessed if I like

I was not in control of myself x)

A person who has epilepsy is not in control of them selves, and they are not possessed.

As far as what you call something, I don't care, but don't be surprised if I counter your point.

yes you may counter anything I say

like ask for evidence, I'll show you a chopped off dick x)

Originally posted by overlord
yes you may counter anything I say

like ask for evidence, I'll show you a chopped off dick x)

I don't ask for evidence of possession. All I will ever get is eye witness accounts that have been heavily propagandized, or something anecdotal, like your severed dick.

haha it's still on