Total posts: 14,582
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
1. What am I, [ontology]2. Why am I here, [philosophical]3. Where do I come from, [metaphysics]4. How do I know, [epistemology]5. What difference does it make [axiology]6. What happens to me when I die [destiny].I reckon I know the answers to most of those! The hard question is 'What do I do?'.I'm interested in what that may be.
1. What am I - Cogito Ergo Sum (I am) "what" is beyond epistemological limits
2. Why am I here - Teleological fallacy - "why" (if there even is such a thing) is beyond epistemological limits
3. Where do I come from - Cosmological fallacy - The big bang, where that came from is beyond epistemological limits
4. How do I know - Through your mind and your senses
5. What difference does it make - You are the most important being in existence
6. What happens to me when I die - You decompose - Your presumed "essence" or "soul" is beyond epistemological limits
It is important to maintain a constant awareness of and vigilant respect of our epistemological limits.
Please challenge my axioms and or point out a specific logical error and or provide a counter-factual.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I'm guessing this is US-centric - religion (particularly 'conservative' Christianity) isn't as big a deal in the UK.
The United Kingdom's decision to revoke the citizenship of Shamima Begum, a British teenager who travelled from London in 2015 to ISIL-controlled Syria, highlights a deeply founded two-tier system, legal experts have said.
Begum's case has created a media frenzy since the now 19-year-old appealed in a television interview last month to be allowed to return home with her newborn son.
Some experts say Home Secretary Sajid Javid's decision to strip her of her citizenship is not unique and points towards a racist policy that has for years targeted British citizens of immigrant backgrounds. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I know a lot of christians are very kind-hearted and friendly people. I just can't figure out why so many of them aren't.
Thanks for your note, I did include a link to the original post. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
Why do you think that Christians are often the most vocal opponents of immigrant rights and minority rights and homosexual rights and slow to forgive repentant terrorists?
Because we as Christians often do not practice what we preach or obey God and are too quick to judge others instead of giving them grace as we have been shown grace.
The way I see it:
Immigration rights - I do not oppose immigration but it should be legal immigration. Criminals bring problems and immorality to a country.
Jerusalem and many cities in ancient Israel had walls for a purpose, to protect those within the walls from evil for the times, just like ours, had lots of evil.
Minority rights - the minority should have the same rights as the majority, not special rights just because they are in the minority unless they have a disability and need additional care, IMO.
Homosexual rights - the Bible teaches some things are wrong because God created humanity with a union of a male with a female in mind as a reflection of a greater truth. This relationship also produces offspring and God command humanity to go out and multiply. A homosexual relationship does not allow such a natural family unit. I believe the best relationship for a family is one that supplies both a male and female influence and example.
Having said all that, I still recognize that it is not mine to judge whether a person is to be saved or not. My responsibility is to know what is right and wrong. If I meet a homosexual person I still recognize they are made in the image and likeness of God [although marred by the Fall] and deserve dignity and respect from me just like God has shown to me, but I do not see the sexual act between gay people as right per the biblical teaching.
Repentant terrorists - I am all for second chances, just like I have been given one. That does not mean that a society should leave wrongful acts unpunished. Where would the justice be in that? But it is not my job to dispense justice but to show the love of Christ to every person in treating them with love and respect, but also to act justly. Now, I shamefully fall short of these qualities often. That is why I am so thankful for what Jesus has done for me - unmerited grace, something I do not deserve yet God mercifully gave! [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
What is the poverty line?
People who are unable to provide basic food, clothing and shelter for themselves.
You basically cite the world happiness report, however, socialism makes a nation well off in the short term, but in the long term, it makes your country comparably ranked to a country like Russia, which is #59 on your list.
1. Finland
2. Norway
3. Denmark
4. Iceland
5. Switzerland
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. New Zealand
9. Sweden
10. Australia
These countries have provided national healthcare for at least 35 years. Do you consider this "short term"?
It acts like a drug. This is because money leaves the country [please cite sources] and people often lose their incentive to work [please cite sources] in a relatively socialist economy, where things are given to them and work is optional. Many people get addicted to government welfare.
Why have the unemployment rates in these countries not skyrocketed? [LINK]
Also, the happiness report easily could be due to other factors.
This statement is a naked appeal to ignorance.
Maybe Canadians are inherently more happy then Americans.
This statement is a naked appeal to ignorance.
A better way to compare the situation is over a 30 [35?] year period, compare the before and after of the implementation of socialism.
Without data to support your claim, this statement is a naked appeal to ignorance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
America has the fattest, wealthiest poor on the entire planet.
This statement is provably false.
The standard of living for a poor American is astronomical compared to the poor anywhere else on the globe.
This statement is also provably false.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
America has the fattest, wealthiest poor on the entire planet. The standard of living for a poor American is astronomical compared to the poor anywhere else on the globe. The "poor" in America live like kings compared to the poor anywhere in Africa.It's a big reason why people jump the border wall.
You might be under the impression that America’s poor are only poor by American standards. After all, the United States is a rich nation, and hey, practically anyone here can at least afford a decent TV.
But no. As Matt Bruenig illustrates at Demos today, low-income Americans get an exceptionally raw deal for residents of the developed world. Using data compiled by LIS, he’s ranked countries by how much income individuals have at their disposal throughout the bottom half of the economic distribution. At the 10th percentile, the U.S. ranks 13th. At the 20th percentile, it reaches 11th—moving up the rankings as it approaches the middle class. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
If you live in texas, you welcome strangers from Oregon 1500 miles away and turn guns on strangers from Chihuahua 10 miles away.Those in Oregon come legally. Do you think you could cross over to Mexico illegally?
Not necessarily.
Visa overstays from Canada 93,035.
Visa overstays from Europe 123,729.
Visa overstays from Asia 56,674.
Combined total of 273,438. Start panicking now!!!!!!!!
Visa overstays from Mexico 42,114.
Visa overstays from South America 93,073.
Visa overstays from Central America 17,069.
Combined total of 152,256.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Eh, maybe, but isn't this where "the rubber meets the road" so to speak?religion has quite enough contention without bringing politics in!
We've established that DEISM =/= "YHWH" and now we've moved on to "YHWH" =/= conservative politics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Illegal immigration has proven to be harmful to your country. [LINK]
This is pure fear-mongering, demonization, dehumanization, broad brush fallacy, and anecdotal evidence.
Your quoted undocumented immigrant felonies number is 300,000 out of an estimated 11,000,000 total undocumented immigrants.
What percentage of 11,000,000 is 300,000?
2.73% [LINK] - So, realistically, you're freaking out because of 2.73%? What about the other 97.27% that are non-murder-rapist-drug-dealers?
About 8.6% of the adult population (of the United States) has a felony conviction. [LINK]
By this measure it is 3.15018315018315 times more fair to say that ALL UNITED STATES CITIZENS ARE VIOLENT CRIMINALS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What about the other 97.27% that are non-murder-rapist-drug-dealers?
What about the other 97.27% that are non-murder-rapist-drug-dealers?
What about the other 97.27% that are non-murder-rapist-drug-dealers?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The number of resources used would be greatly reduced with a wall, as the border agents have stated.
Citation please.
An unpatrolled, unmonitored wall is easily breached by either simple power tools and or chemicals and or common explosives.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Is that really your primary measure of "success"?It's how I measure how wealthy the average person within a society is.
Let's check the percentage of the population that is living below the poverty line.
Taiwan 1.5%
China 3.3%
Austria 4%
Switzerland 6.6%
Ireland 8.2%
Canada 9.4%
Russia 13.3%
France 14%
UK 15%
Sweden 15%
USA 15.1%
Japan 16.1%
Germany 16.7%
Israel 22%
Italy 29.9%
Let's check the World Happiness Report.
1. Finland
2. Norway
3. Denmark
4. Iceland
5. Switzerland
6. Netherlands
7. Canada
8. New Zealand
9. Sweden
10. Australia
11. Israel
12. Austria
13. Costa Rica
14. Ireland
15. Germany
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
All of these places have lower GDP per capitas then the US.
Is that really your primary measure of "success"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I think it is arguable that historically nominally 'socialist' regimes have degenerated into facism
It's also funny that Rome was established as a republic and then degenerated into a dictatorship as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Or Canada, or Israel, or Germany.36% of the population ought to take a vacation to Venezuela to see what happens when your country goes socialist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The opposition is suppressed. Those who oppose big government are demonized.
This is true under any conceivable system of law regardless of ideology.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The bringing in of billions of dollars of drugs into your country every year is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Demonizing immigrants and building a wall will do nothing to stop drug smugglers.
"Well over 95% of the drugs are moving on the water via container ships, non-commercial vessels, pleasure boats, sail boats, fishing boats. They also have fast boats which try to outrun our law enforcement assets."
"We've seen growing use of self-propelled semi-submersibles (SPSSs) - low-profile vessels made out of marine-grade plywood [and] fibreglass with commercial engines. The smugglers spend up to a $1m (£665,000) to build one of these SPSSs for what is often just a one-way voyage. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Those in Oregon come legally. Do you think you could cross over to Mexico illegally?
Did the Spanish Conquistadors enter South America legally?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
If you live in texas, you welcome strangers from Oregon 1500 miles away and turn guns on strangers from Chihuahua 10 miles away.
Good point. And I guess EU citizens that are able to travel to and from neighboring countries freely are now going to cause a continent wide crime spree like the world has never seen!
French can drive to Germany on a whim!
Italians can fly into London whenever they want!
Oh the horror!! Oh the humanity!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@b9_ntt
“But the Unmoved Mover, as the source of all change, is the source of things coming to have the attributes they have.
This is a description of Kant's noumeon. This is a logical and necessary premise, however I would take issue with the terminology "unmoved mover".
A better description would be "eternal substance". Something that is eternal and unchanging cannot "move". It might only "apparently move" from a subjective viewpoint, like that of a human, but to an objective observer, who necessarily views all things and all times with equal clarity, "movement" is "impossible". Thank you Parmenides.
Hence He has these attributes eminently if not formally.
Wait. "HE"???????????????????/ Where the heck did we jump to the conclusion that its a HE? Please explain this snuck premise.
That includes every power, so that He is all-powerful.
If noumenon is all things that would include all conceivable power, axiomatically.
It also includes the intellect and will that human beings possess . . .
If noumenon is all things that would include all conceivable things, axiomatically.
so that He must be said to have intellect and will, and thus personality, in an analogical sense.
If noumenon is all things that would include all conceivable things, axiomatically.
However, it would be illogical to conclude that, as a whole, the vast expanse of all possible existence "has a personality".
It certainly contains or includes humans and humans have a Qualitative attribute we like to call "personality".
But the full scope and breadth of noumenon and its fundamental nature is BEYOND OUR HUMAN EPISTEMOLOGICAL LIMITS (Ein Sof).
It must have them in the highest degree, lacking any limitations inherent in a material being.
Now he says "it"? It must have all attributes that exist in all possible degrees, but not "unlimited" or "infinite" because INFINITY is an incoherent concept.
“Hence He not only has knowledge, but knowledge without limit, being all-knowing.”
Noumenon contains all possible things, including knowledge, but not "without limit".
It has no negative features or defects.
Noumenon has every possible (subjectively) "negative" feature and or defect because it is literally everything.
Those would be privations, absence of a positive attributes and the FM has all attributes fully actualized. All-good in an analogical sense.”
Noumenon is everything. There is absolutely no way to logically separate it into either exclusively "all good" or "all bad".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
And everyone forgets that during WW2 the Unites States was begging Mexicans to cross the border to work in factories, and then, just a few years after the war, mass deportations began.Legally?
My point is that "legally" is 100% arbitrary. It's not a "moral issue" like "murder" for example.
There is nothing in either Leviticus or the Ten Commandments that says, "don't move to another country if your situation becomes desperate".
And don't you think that something like helping the Unites States win WW2 should perhaps be acknowledged and rewarded??????
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Your quoted undocumented immigrant felonies number is 300,000 out of an estimated 11,000,000 total undocumented immigrants.
What percentage of 11,000,000 is 300,000?
2.73% [LINK] - So, realistically, you're freaking out because of 2.73%? What about the other 97.27% that are non-murder-rapist-drug-dealers?
About 8.6% of the adult population (of the United States) has a felony conviction. [LINK]
By this measure it is 3.15018315018315% more fair to say that ALL UNITED STATES CITIZENS ARE VIOLENT CRIMINALS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@b9_ntt
C.S. Lewis did it better. [LINK]I don’t think so. Sounds like bs to me.
C.S. Lewis was a much better master of BS than Feser.
Parmenides explains this better. Congratulations, you have now disproved the concept of FREEWILL. [LINK]This speaker talks too fast for me.
WTF mate. Please expose your axioms. [LINK]This links to “The End of the World.” I don’t see the relevance.
Please explain why "An FM must be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, and have personality".
Why would anyone take this statement at face-value? WTF mate.
Humans are defined by their limitations. If a god has no human limitations, then it is not "like a human" and cannot be said to have specifically human characteristics (like intellect and will and personality and gender). [LINK]This links to a Rick & Morty Cartoon, “We need a hang glider.” I don’t see the relevance.
The link gives an example of a conceivable "god". It is funny because this "god" still "thinks like a human" because, presumably, it used to be either an actual human or something more like a human than like a "god". As its capabilities grow, it makes less and less sense for it to behave "like a human".
Unactualized actualizer. [LINK]This link to Rationality Rules is relevant but includes unnecessary stuff that makes it tedious to listen to. I'm working on it.
I thought the point/counterpoint format was reasonably informative.
Or ultimate observer. [LINK]This one, Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism, is interesting. I’m still studying it.
I guess 1 out of 6 isn't bad? Let me know what you think. I only agree with this one about 80%.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Also, don't conflicting doctrines disprove each other? I mean, if the catholics are right, then the methodists and lutherans must be dead wrong, right?Sure, but what is our standard, our highest authority? Is it the Catholic or the Protestant or is it the Bible - God's word? If it is God's word then there must be a correct way of interpreting it for that is what we are told by Scripture.
But don't you think it's funny how each and every one believes their own interpretation is the one and only correct one?
I mean, if god was so perfect and logical, wouldn't all true believers interpret things exactly the same way?
Doesn't the simple fact that there is such wide-spread disagreement among true believers indicate that the document might not be "perfectly clear"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
My responsibility is to know what is right and wrong.
For yourself. Which would appear to be "the ten commandments", which doesn't mention immigrants or minorities or male homosexuals or terrorists.
If I meet a homosexual person I still recognize they are made in the image and likeness of God [although marred by the Fall]
"Marred by the Fall" like literally everyone on planet earth.
and deserve dignity and respect from me just like God has shown to me, but I do not see the sexual act between gay people as right per the biblical teaching.
Do you have an opinion on each and every sexual act? Do you believe that married (hetero) couples who engage in certain types of (not strictly reproductive) sexual acts should also be banned from the church?
Repentant terrorists - I am all for second chances, just like I have been given one. That does not mean that a society should leave wrongful acts unpunished.
Nobody is suggesting they should go "scott-free". The question is whether or not there is any path-to-redemption (have their day in court). The frightening thing is that it appears that we are now "stripping people of their birth-right citizenship" without due process, and with no path-to-redemption. I was always told that we were born with inalienable rights. If you can legally strip a person of all legal recourse and legal rights without even charging them with a crime, then I believe we have a very serious problem on our hands.
Do you have any "non-traditional" or "non-mainstream" beliefs? Well, just wait until someone who self-identifies as an "atheist" (for example) or someone from your group or "methodist" or "buddhist" or "gun owner" or "SUV owner" commits a heinous crime somewhere that makes it into the 6 o'clock news everywhere and then, BAM, "atheists" (or your group) will be capriciously stripped of their citizenship at will and nobody will even bat-an-eyelash.
Where would the justice be in that?
Indeed.
But it is not my job to dispense justice but to show the love of Christ to every person in treating them with love and respect, but also to act justly.
That sounds reasonable.
Now, I shamefully fall short of these qualities often. That is why I am so thankful for what Jesus has done for me - unmerited grace, something I do not deserve yet God mercifully gave!
I know a lot of christians are very kind-hearted and friendly people. I just can't figure out why so many of them aren't.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The way I see it:Immigration rights - I do not oppose immigration but it should be legal immigration.
Here's the problem. Legal avenues are broken. Waiting lists are 20+ years. Citizenship tests are unrealistic (most citizens can't pass).
And everyone forgets that during WW2 the Unites States was begging Mexicans to cross the border to work in factories, and then, just a few years after the war, mass deportations began.
Criminals bring problems and immorality to a country.
Conflating immigrants with criminals is provably false. Even the conservative CATO institute concluded that undocumented immigrants are slightly less likely than native born citizens to engage in criminal behavior. This type of rhetoric is pure fear-mongering.
Jerusalem and many cities in ancient Israel had walls for a purpose, to protect those within the walls from evil for the times, just like ours, had lots of evil.
Ancient cities had walls to protect them from ARMIES not immigrants.
Minority rights - the minority should have the same rights as the majority, not special rights just because they are in the minority unless they have a disability and need additional care, IMO.
Here's the problem. Minorities were systematically discriminated against in the past. Banks red-lined neighborhoods. Schools were criminally underfunded. The effects of this incontrovertible discrimination continue to affect the exact same neighborhoods and schools. Do you think this is a mere coincidence? Do you think something should be done to give these people at least some token of hope? The proposals I've heard recently never mention "race". They are basic, common sense proposals like, (IFF) all Americans have a right to an equal education (THEN) all schools should be similarly funded and equipped. If one school has a computer lab and a debate team and a band and multiple sports teams and another school can't even afford textbooks and clean running water, that would seem to qualify as a serious problem, if not an all out national emergency.
Homosexual rights - the Bible teaches some things are wrong
Here's the problem. The "bible" teaches a lot of things. In the Levitical law, where the prohibition against male homosexuality is mentioned, it also says you can't eat cheeseburgers or get a divorce. So if you won't allow homosexuals in your church, then BY THE EXACT SAME MEASURE you should also not allow anyone who eats cheeseburgers or divorcees. In-fact you should kick out anyone who doesn't eat kosher and observe the Sabbath as well. You can't cherry pick. There's nothing in the "bible" that suggests that male homosexuality is any worse than any of the other thousands of enumerated violations.
because God created humanity with a union of a male with a female in mind as a reflection of a greater truth.
If god made everything, and knows everything, is male homosexuality some sort of "mistake" that god couldn't have "fixed" for some reason?
The only possible conclusion is that god made male homosexuals on purpose, probably as a hedge against overpopulation.
This relationship also produces offspring and God command humanity to go out and multiply.
This is a red-herring. If you really believe this, then you should kick everyone out of the church who is infertile or refuses to have children. Catholics and many other christian denominations either expressly prohibit contraception or prohibit sex education. Would you propose we kick out everyone from the church who uses contraception? This policy would at least be logically consistent with your proposed argument.
A homosexual relationship does not allow such a natural family unit. I believe the best relationship for a family is one that supplies both a male and female influence and example.
Certainly, in an ideal world, children should be raised with both of their birth parents. But this does not mean that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to adopt orphans. It also doesn't mean that single-parent families should be kicked out of the church.
Having said all that, I still recognize that it is not mine to judge whether a person is to be saved or not.
Ok, so why would you even comment on it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Hostile in the sense that I don't like deception of falsehood.It is not the person who holds the belief I object to but the falsity of the belief itself.
Don't you think the "atheist" might think exactly the same thing about christianity?
It seems a bit unfair to say the "atheist" "hates god" when they really just hate falsehood and deception.
Also, don't conflicting doctrines disprove each other? I mean, if the catholics are right, then the methodists and lutherans must be dead wrong, right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
But does it eliminate free will? Are we mechanical systems that are determined?
Clearly we are biological and not mechanical. Do you believe that biological systems are subject to cause and effect?
Sure, which means that our wills are not free like Adams was. Yet we still have a volition. We still choose.
What makes you think Adam had freewill?
What makes you think that we have "volition"?
Of course we "choose" things, but the point is that our "choices" are (EITHER) caused (OR) uncaused (this is tautological).
(IFF) our choices are caused (THEN) they are not free (because they are inevitable).
(IFF) our choices are uncaused (THEN) they are not willed (because they are random).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I reckon I know the answers to most of those! The hard question is 'What do I do?'.
Grace and YOLO!!!!!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Yes, I am hostile to them since they are false idols that damage people who displace God with them.
How can you be hostile to things you believe are imaginary? Where's your forgiveness and love for everybody?
I would reference the Ten Commandments. Is it wrong to murder, to steal, to lie, to covet, to worship things that are not God and displace Him with these things?No, I do not follow the Levitical laws. They were set up for the purpose of leading people to Christ. It shows us that we cannot meet God's righteous standard nor meet His just and righteous requirements by our own effort.If you think you can be justified by following the law then what happens when you don't meet God's perfect and just standard?
I thought you said something about grace. Doesn't grace fix everything?
What practical and actionable advice does this give you?It teaches me to forgive others as I have been forgiven, to try not to hold a grudge, to offer mercy and grace to others as I have been shown grace and mercy, to be kind as I have received kindness, to put others first as Jesus put me before His own comfort and life, to invest in other as God has invested in me, and so on.
Why do you think that christians are often the most vocal opponents of immigrant rights and minority rights and homosexual rights and slow to forgive repentant terrorists?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
I do not presume that sola scriptura from other religions are true.
This is a thought experiment. Try to imagine approaching another ancient text as if it were 100% true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Materialism is determined (how can it be anything but?) yet I am not a materialist. I don't believe in materialism.
Substance dualism does not invalidate causality.
Even ghosts, spirits, souls, angels, and gods are either taking actions based on previous events (information/knowledge/experience) or are acting without cause (randomly/based on zero information/knowledge/experience).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
So, confidence and hope and knowledge and a friend.Truth, certainty, knowledge of God as He truly is (provided I correctly interpret His revelation), hope for the future, victory over death, a relationship and intimate understanding of His character and attributes, Someone to confide in, a Protector, One who loves me and forgives me all my human faults, a new nature that is no longer hostile to God, an understanding of the human condition, His teaching on what is right and wrong, and so much more.
No atheist is "hostile to god". Are you "hostile to Ahura Mazda or Marduk"?
Please explain what is right and wrong? Do you just follow the Levitical law?
What practical and actionable advice does this give you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
It tells me that God can be trusted and that He has provided the means of atonement for our sins, that He is willing to forgive us and restore us to a living relationship with Him, that He (in Jesus the Savior) has met what we could not meet upon our own merit. Every world religion provides a system to restore us to God by what we do. Christianity is different. Someone else restores us so it is not based on our merit or works but by those of another.
I'm willing to accept you at your word on this (once again, for the sake of this particular argument).
Let's say the scriptures as you understand them are 100% irrefutable pure uncut truth.
What practical and actionable advice does this give you?
Grace and then what?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The question is why do you doubt?
Shifting the burden of proof fallacy. The question is, why do you believe? Doubt is always the default position. It does not require "a reason".
Why do you doubt Ahura Mazda? Don't you see how ridiculous that question sounds?
Here are two scenarios for your consideration from a biblical perspective:
False dichotomy fallacy.
Do you think that you do not want to believe despite the evidence
Begging the question. Ancient writing is not necessarily "evidence".
because you do not want to be accountable to God but want to do your own thing?
Dime-store psychoanalysis. Do you disbelieve in karma because you don't want to be accountable to karma?
Do you think that your own mind holds the keys to life and you will discover them unaided by God?
(IFF) god made human minds (AND) god is all knowing (THEN) god knew what our minds would conclude before we were ever born.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Yet Jesus fits the type to a tee. He fits the Second Adam, the Second Moses, the type of the sacrificial system, the type of the feasts, the type of Deliverer, Priest, Prophet, King, Mediator. What is said of God in the OT is applied to Jesus in the NT. The Mosaic Covenant people make a covenant with God; the NT people covenant is made through Jesus and is a covenant in Him.I scarce need to say that if I asked brutal he'd say Jesus is nothing like Adam or Moses!
I might also say,
(IFF) the Jesus is the second adam, the second moses, the type of the sacrificial system (dead sheep), the type of the feasts (cannibalism), the type of deliverer (like DHL), priest, prophet (of themself), king (of which territory), mediator (THEN) what exactly is your conclusion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
it's not immediately apparent how that refutes Feser's argument!Fundamentally Feser/Aquinas is based on Aristotelian physics and so their arguments' defects are the defects of Aristolelian physics, in particular that a force is required for sustained motion, which we now know to be false.Once 1b ('Something must move them')is falsified the rest of the argument is rendered irrelevant.
If the Higgs field ceases to exist, then matter (energy) becomes incoherent.
This is the argument for why a "god" must be actively sustaining "everything".
It also destroys the argument that a "god" merely allows "evil" to exist, but does not "cause" it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@b9_ntt
Let me know if you need more specifics.Bravo! You have given me lots of things to study. Thank you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@b9_ntt
Feser’s / Aquinas’ arguments for an “unmoved mover.” (Last Superstition, pp. 95-99)1. Feser deduces the existence of a First Mover (FM), becausea. Some things move.b. Something must move them.c. There cannot be an infinite regress of movers.d. Therefore, there is a FM, whose existence does not need to be actualized by anything else.
Spinoza covers this better. Congratulations, you now have DEISM which is functionally identical to ATHEISM.
2. A First Mover must be itself unmoved, unchanging, and unmovable.a. If it was moving or changing, i.e., going from potential to actual, something outside it would have to be moving it. Then it would not be the first mover.b. It must also be unmovable to avoid an infinite regress of movers. So the FM must be fully actualized, with no potential. Having no potentiality, it could not possibly move or change.
Parmenides explains this better. Congratulations, you have now disproved the concept of FREEWILL. [LINK]
3. There can be only one FM.a. If there were more than one being of pure actuality, there would have to be some way to distinguish between them; one would have to have some feature the other one lacked.b. To lack a feature is to have an unrealized potentiality.c. A purely actual being has no unrealized potentialities, by definition.
Spinoza covers this better. Congratulations, you now have DEISM which is functionally identical to ATHEISM.
4. An FM must be immaterial.“To be a material thing entails being changeable in various ways.”
Monism. All conceivable gods must be able to interact with energy/matter/space/time either directly or indirectly and must therefore maintain a fundamental similarity. Noumenon.
5. An FM must be eternal.Beginning or ceasing to exist would be an instance of change. It is outside time and space.
Spinoza covers this better. Congratulations, you now have DEISM which is functionally identical to ATHEISM.
6. As “the common first member of all the various essentially ordered causal series that result in these instances of change, the Unmoved Mover is outside and distinct from them all, as that which sustains the entire world in motion from instant to instant.”
"Outside and distinct" is noumenon. Not "fundamentally immaterial" but rather epistemologically unknowable. Magnum Mysterium.
7. An FM must be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, and have personality.
WTF mate. Please expose your axioms. [LINK]
“But the Unmoved Mover, as the source of all change, is the source of things coming to have the attributes they have. Hence He has these attributes eminently if not formally.
WTF mate. Please expose your axioms. [LINK]
That includes every power, so that He is all-powerful. It also includes the intellect and will that human beings possess . . . so that He must be said to have intellect and will, and thus personality, in an analogical sense. It must have them in the highest degree, lacking any limitations inherent in a material being.
Humans are defined by their limitations. If a god has no human limitations, then it is not "like a human" and cannot be said to have specifically human characteristics (like intellect and will and personality and gender). [LINK]
“Hence He not only has knowledge, but knowledge without limit, being all-knowing.” It has no negative features or defects. Those would be privations, absence of a positive attributes and the FM has all attributes fully actualized. All-good in an analogical sense.”
Where did you get "all-good" from?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
Survival bias is part of the instinct.
Your ontology is very similar to but not identical to my own.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
The answer could be based on the factuality and logical consistency and coherency of the evidence of A, B, or C, or the number of contradictions and inconsistencies in making sense of A, B, or C.
You seem to be suffering from the "objectivity" delusion.
The evidence is never 100% coherent. That's why you need apologetics to explain how 70 weeks turns into 490 years or whatever.
The ancient text is not "self-evident". It is not sola scriptura. [LINK]
(IFF) you presume that your personally preferred sola scriptura is true (THEN) everyone who disagrees with you is either insincere, stupid, intellectually blind and deaf, or purely evil.
(IFF) you presume that sola scriptura of another religion is true (THEN) everyone who disagrees with you is either insincere, stupid, intellectually blind and deaf, or purely evil.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Does the empire state building exist, is it mentioned or depicted in spiderman comics? That then is evidence that spiderman exists irl.
Phenomenal point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
I'm willing to accept you at your word on this (for the sake of this particular argument).There is a unity from the OT Scriptures that is explained and makes sense from the NT perspective. Prophecy and its fulfillment make sense from the NT perspective.
Let's say the scriptures as you understand them are 100% irrefutable pure uncut truth.
What practical and actionable advice does this give you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
It's based on survival instinct.
And survival bias.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
Don't you think it's a little strange that parts of the gospels and the story of the messiah were written down before the Jesus was born?Such as (other than prophecy)?
From the moment of their discovery, some scholars suggested that at least some of the scrolls may be the work of early Christians. After all, a certain “Teacher of Righteousness” is mentioned as a persecuted figure and there is also a “Wicked Priest” and other characters that seem to mirror early Christianity. Most scholars, however, have dismissed any connection between the community that hid their scroll library some 2,000 years ago in caves at Qumran and the earliest followers of Jesus. Now, I’ve made a discovery that may change all this. Put simply, I believe that one of the fragments called by scholars by the very unappealing name of “4Q541” explicitly refers to Jesus. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@b9_ntt
I'm watching this Fesser interview. [LINK]
What caused god? - no answer.
Just define god as the "prime mover". Ontological gymnastics. [LINK]
Overemphasizes cause and effect as if it is being disputed by anyone.
Just define god as the "unactualized actualizer". Ontological gymnastics. [LINK]
(IFF) god stops playing the song (THEN) the universe will instantly vaporize into non-existence. Bald assertion.
Convinced that "supernatural" events are possible. Bald assertion.
Sola Scriptura is fundamentally inadequate and therefore, catholicism is true. Non sequitur.
Declares the harmony of faith and reason. Bald assertion.
If humans have no supernatural soul, then we are equal to animals. Bald assertion. Begging the question.
Claims his philosophical proof is not inductive or probabilistic. Bald assertion.
Claims his axioms are not reasonably doubtable. Bald assertion.
Claims faith = reason. Provably false. This actually contradicts his own stated definition of faith which is "revealed by god".
Admits that "the trinity" is not knowable through purely rational philosophical investigation.
Charitably claims that "not everyone who fails to be convinced is intellectually dishonest". A naked rush to disqualify.
And then claims that if someone says "the arguments are not convincing" they are "covering" for their own irrational rejection of god (or a "spiritual" problem). Classic dime-store psychoanalysis.
"Faith of the Fatherless" is another rush to disqualify by way of dime-store psychoanalysis.
Can you name a prominent female atheist? Can you name a prominent female prophet or church leader?
Proposes that atheist anger about the concept of god in general is somehow "proof" that god is real. Non sequitur.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PGA2.0
So you have nothing regarding prophecy that can be verified as yet? It all applies to that age? The supposed mythical city of Sambhala/Shangrila will be build sometime in the future, correct?You're right, I'm laughing.
Give me a call when the messiah returns. What's the exact date you're expecting them again?
Created: