By claiming the two meanings are the same, Romansh is twisting language into a false logic, which is precisely the error I had hoped we could avoid. Romansh does not need such a tactic to make the case against free will, and since he agreed with much of what I wrote in my first post, I have to say I am deeply disappointed that he has now deliberately resorted to it! I shall have a little sob into my pillow. Good night, folks.-Nowhere did I claim this dhw, I don't think this.-Now I could use the same language as you and ask, why does dhw choose to twist language. -I can't help wondering if dhw is deliberated distorting what I said. [i]just joking[/i]-Can I guggest dhw et al. that instead of accusing one another of distortions we try and understand what each of us are trying to say.-Funnily enough I do understand what you (and Tony) are saying.