Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

[cynic]

Philosophies aren’t ‘chosen,’ they are arrived at via logic - debate was something that was utterly devoid in every post you made.
Your morbidly mind numbing blind faith was what you adhered to at every turn. Your chosen twaddle is as far away from philosophy and genuine debate as a thing can be.

Your view unflinchingly remained devoid of understanding and insight into what ever was said.
For those bothering to reply to what you, only found that they may as well have been trying to explain something to a chipmunk.

Your still here -

View attachment 85567

Do you truly believe all that you have said here?

 

[notting]

Do you truly believe all that you have said here?

Perhaps, I missed something as most of it was unbearable to read. So I have no evidence to the contrary.

 

[cynic]

Perhaps, I missed something as most of it was unbearable to read. So I have no evidence to the contrary.

What do you think it was, about my postings, that rendered them "unbearable to read"?

 

[notting]

Usually the way they began, I wouldn't get much further.
I hope you are young.

 

[cynic]

Usually the way they began, I wouldn't get much further.
I hope you are young.

I am glad that I am not!

 

[notting]

Why?

 

[cynic]

Why?

Because I understood so much less when I was younger.

 

[notting]

Because I understood so much less when I was younger.

If only you were a comic

 

[cynic]

If only you were a comic

 

[grah33]

That was hilarious Cynic. I had quite a few loud laughs this week actually...

 

[Value Collector]

The claim to superiority of secular morality.

That’s easy, over time humans have become more and more moral, where as the religious texts remain unchanged for 100’s or 1,000’d of years.

In fact without their secular values, religious people tend to go and commit all sorts of nasty acts which their texts condone.

The only reason less of he bad biblical instructions are followed is because most modern religious people use their secular morals to interpret their texts.

 

[Value Collector]

Anything that changes over time (like universes) must have a beginning. It's a breach of the laws of physics to say that physical properties like mass and energy always existed. A god would be outside the laws of physics because the god would have created those laws in the first place.

1, but why does the “beginning” require s god

2, wouldn’t this god still exist in its own demension, subject to that demensions laws of physics, and wouldn’t that demension require a beginning and therefore a god?

 

[Value Collector]

Don't know how morality actually applies in atheism. It's like saying a fox (we're like animals) is immoral for killing 50 rabbits on an island ,even if it weren't hungry. That is why secularism allows for e..g killing an 8 month unborn baby by stabbing it in the head (very gruesome). We certainly have less human dignity in secularism.

Our morals evolved with us, as social species we developed a code of conduct over time to allow us to live together, no need for a god.

Who allows the killing of an 8 month unborn baby?

You don’t need religion to have morals, you need empathy, and an understanding that your actions affect others and the way they treat you.

 

[SirRumpole]

1, but why does the “beginning” require s god

Nobody knows what the beginning required. You have said you don't know, I am saying that intelligent creation is a possibility, but you seem to have ruled this out.

2, wouldn’t this god still exist in its own demension, subject to that demensions laws of physics, and wouldn’t that demension require a beginning and therefore a god?

A god would probably exist in all dimensions, but laws of physics only apply to physical objects, and a god is not likely to be physical.

 

[cynic]

There are many things about Christian faith that are immoral.

Secular morality is far superior.

That’s easy, over time humans have become more and more moral, where as the religious texts remain unchanged for 100’s or 1,000’d of years.

In fact without their secular values, religious people tend to go and commit all sorts of nasty acts which their texts condone.

The only reason less of he bad biblical instructions are followed is because most modern religious people use their secular morals to interpret their texts.

If those "modern religious people" interpreting their texts, are theists, from whence could they possibly have acquired these "secular morals"? i.e. how could such people, come to be possessed, of any kind of secular morality?

Can secular morality be objectively defined?

And how could any true Christian, other than a masochist, commit "all sorts of nasty acts" when their religious doctrine instructs them to treat everyone the way they themselves would like to be treated.

In light of this, where within your perception of secular morality, may one find an instruction so lofty, as to warrant claims to the moral superiority of secular wisdom?

 

[luutzu]

Nobody knows what the beginning required. You have said you don't know, I am saying that intelligent creation is a possibility, but you seem to have ruled this out.

A god would probably exist in all dimensions, but laws of physics only apply to physical objects, and a god is not likely to be physical.

Earth is so insignificant in the scale of the universe, heck, even within our own solar system, that if there is a Creator (of the Universe), we apes are definitely not created from His image.

There are countless stars and planets and galaxies in the known universe. It takes, I don't know... millions or billions of light year to cross from one end to the other. A God that created that universe wouldn't know, or care, if we Earthlings existed or not.

Oh wait, maybe that does prove there is a God and He's forgotten about us

 

[luutzu]

If those "modern religious people" interpreting their texts, are theists, from whence could they possibly have acquired these "secular morals"? i.e. how could such people, come to be possessed, of any kind of secular morality?

Can secular morality be objectively defined?

And how could any true Christian, other than a masochist, commit "all sorts of nasty acts" when their religious doctrine instructs them to treat everyone the way they themselves would like to be treated.

In light of this, where within your perception of secular morality, may one find an instruction so lofty, as to warrant claims to the moral superiority of secular wisdom?

I think religious texts have them exception clauses.

Treat everyone as you would like to be treated... except for the gays, the this and the that. And oh, convert non-believers... how and by what means is up to the guy I chose as my representative.


Maybe through evolution, and through socialisation, people come to do "good" and be moral without having to read the good book.

 

[Value Collector]

I am saying that intelligent creation is a possibility,

How do you know it’s a possibility?

This isn’t just a word game, I am pointing out a real issue with your arguement, no one has proven it’s possible for a god to exist, so I think if you are going to say god is a possibility, that’s s claim that requires evidence.

If I a black pouch with an unknown number of dice in it, you might think it’s possible for me to roll a 37.

But if in fact there is only 3 dice the most I could roll would be 18, so anyone going round saying “anything is possible off course he can roll 37” would be wrong.

The correct position would be to say “I don’t know if he can roll a 37” not “it’s a possibility”

 

[Value Collector]

If those "modern religious people" interpreting their texts, are theists, from whence could they possibly have acquired these "secular morals"? i.e. how could such people, come to be possessed, of any kind of secular morality?

Can secular morality be objectively defined?

And how could any true Christian, other than a masochist, commit "all sorts of nasty acts" when their religious doctrine instructs them to treat everyone the way they themselves would like to be treated.

In light of this, where within your perception of secular morality, may one find an instruction so lofty, as to warrant claims to the moral superiority of secular wisdom?

Voting to deny marriage rights to same sex couples is a recent example of a nasty thing a religious Christian might do.

The Bible says not to suffer a witch to live? Hence some Christians kill witches/innocent people accused of being witches.

Secular morality is the morals most of us live by, that would cause a person to not want to kill an accused witch even though they my be some where on the religious spectrum.

If a Christian is willing to support the use of condoms to help fight aids, that’s some secular morality leaking into their thought process, and causing them to ignore some Christian doctrines in favor of doing actual good

 

[SirRumpole]

How do you know it’s a possibility?

How do you know an infinite universe is a possibility ?