Forgive me for being blunt: I didn't understand a single sentence of what you just wrotemagnum wrote:I disagree fully.
Free will has a lot to do with it explaining why human nature is the way it is.
Why do we always have to over complicate things, you ever notice how when someone wants to confuse a argument they bring something ancient or that happened so long ago no one can prove or disprove anything?
Sure one could say the bible story is a vary old story too.
Don't get me wrong, but general statements without content to back them up don't mean much.
Anyone who doesn't believe in jesus is obviously unfamiliar with the history surrounding it, the catholic chruch blew the story out of proportion years ago, judaism was even a mix of confusion, the truth is much older and obvious.
See, I just said a bunch of things that didn't get proved, sounded factual and I didn't even say anything historical give a reason, for all you know if you didn't read about it or aren't informed I could have made jesus up.
No one wins in a argument, only in the seeking of truth and finding it do we win.
because in the end, a argument two or more partys trying to discharge superiority and alpha status regardless of right wrong or the truth, be it physically mentally or emotionally politically, it's all power and posturing.
So lets stop dick measuring people, because someone always comes along and shows you he can jump rope with his penis and makes the previous argument redundant, regardless of your creed.
If I'm interpreting you well, I think you're right to say both odbo and I are bringing forward our points of view based on information that is ultimately impossible to prove. The Internet allows easy dissemination of everything and its opposite and has just massively contributed to this "total relativism". If that's the case it would be impossible to debate about anything.
The only thing that is superbly objective to me is that human nature is what it is: it's been like this throughout history to this very moment. It's been like this before they talked about Khrisna, before they talked about Buddha, Christ, Mohammed and Scientology. A good man is a good man regardless if he has been brought up reading the Vedas or the Harry Potter saga. An evil man can be so even without having ever heard of any religion.
A belief system can forge, deviate or inspire and educate the human soul, but only in direct proportion to the unique mix of nature and nurture that each individual possesses and receives later in life.
Do I make sense?