Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And THIS ^^^ is the type of disrespect I call out.
You can believe calling out your disrespect to be "personal abuse", that's fine with me.
I don't have to respect your nonsense, and how dare you tell me I have to or even should.
Your "religion", and your advocacy thereof, are both laughable. Got it? LAUGHABLE. That's my opinion on it, and I don't have to keep it bottled up just to save your petty feelings from being hurt.
See, to me, it doesn't really matter what they do or don't figure out about The Universe (God) ..my reasoning informs me that it is the ultimate Source (Creator) of everything.
How, why, when exactly?...doesn't matter.
When you behold hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars...whatever that came to be by and through (The Universe), whatever sourced THAT...certainly passes muster as God to me.
I can't really say that what you or others believe really matters to me either, except perhaps as people begin to veer into other people's lanes with their beliefs. AKA impose their beliefs on others.
Otherwise, this back-and-forth is for the most part simply exchange of opinion. An intellectual exercise, though futile and little more than a waste of time for me before I get going with my day soon after. No more and no less. Though more often than not it does seem like a lot less...
That's an interesting point. And I guess my question would be -- if everything is god, then that means that everything bad and evil is god. Seems like an odd thing to worship.
Very good point. If everything is God, all the good and bad is God.
Also, as another poster commented, if everything is God, then God would have had to create itself. Which is logically problematic (though I'm open to suggestions to resolve this logical conundrum).
The explicit problem with God creating itself is:
If X created Y, then X must have preceded Y. But if X and Y are the same thing, X could not have preceded Y, hence X could not have created Y.
Yeah...all the Religion/Religious bashers I call out & shine a light on take it the same way.
Those that don't do that...typically don't take it that way.
That or there is always that option to ignore the nonsense coming from all directions. I try to do that as best I can, but sometimes the nonsense does get the better of us. Especially when it tends to dominate the thread. I try to point that out every now and then as well...
We can all simply step over the turds (sorry again for that fecal matter reference) and think back to the topic of the thread.
That is a science book. In the previous post you claimed that you didn't need academic or science thought. You can't even be consistent between posts, such is the laughably foolish level of your posts.
So:
-If you are making a claim based on science, get the relevant sections from that book, and explicitly write out your reasoning. This probably would be best had in the science forum.
-If you are not making a claim based on science, then believe whatever you want to. Delusional or not you are free to believe in anything as long as it is not harmful to others.
Hey, hey, hey!
You want claims to be explained and substantiated in this way, in this forum? You might as well be asking for another divine miracle. We don't do that sort of thing here! I'm not sure that even happens in the science forum, but you make me think that maybe that would be a better forum for me. Thanks!
More of that lack of reading comprehension I see. Here is the conversation, starting in other threads.
-Arach made a claim involving a biology textbook. He claimed that he uses "bottom up thinking"
-I said that if he is making a claim about a textbook, then he should explicitly state the part of the textbook he is using, the logic he is using, etc
-He says that logic and reasoning is required for claims, but says he can't post that because it is against the rules
-I say how about the science forum
-He acts like I asked him to throw his first born child in a volcano.
-I find out this thread is a special one where moderators may allow more science to be discussed
-I do his job for him and post an excerpt from a biology book
-He responds with some logic. I commend him for that.
-I point out that his logic is flawed. His logic would lead to a house being classified as more alive than not. I am still not making a claim myself about the topic, I am pointing out the flaw in his claim.
-Some foolish posters act as if I was the one making a claim about a biology book.
The title of that textbook is catchy, means nothing about the detail inside. But then you are not one for the detail are you?
You remind me of a traffic cop I once watched trying to direct traffic in the middle of a massive multi-directional intersection in Bangkok...
This topic will never advance on this forum until GldnRule stops personally abusing people who don't agree with him.
Moderators, could you please get GldnRule to modify his personal abuse towards others? Thank you.
Jumbo,
I just noticed your join date! Welcome!
Trust me on this. If you don't ignore what is not worthy of consideration and/or if you take any of it too seriously, you're in for a lot of unnecessary heartburn. Nobody can really stop some people from being who/what they are. The mods have enough on their hands without serving as playground monitors, which is why I never use the ignore function. (You might want to consider it's use however). Also why I never report anyone.
Can't take any of this at all too seriously, unless of course we take ourselves a bit too seriously. Stick with the topic of the thread, ignore the nonsense, and there just might be some people who will follow your lead that way.
Very good point. If everything is God, all the good and bad is God.
Also, as another poster commented, if everything is God, then God would have had to create itself. Which is logically problematic (though I'm open to suggestions to resolve this logical conundrum).
The explicit problem with God creating itself is:
If X created Y, then X must have preceded Y. But if X and Y are the same thing, X could not have preceded Y, hence X could not have created Y.
Since you are so new here, I think you might appreciate a thread or two I started that unlike the others you have not seen yet. You too Peter!
I invite you to comment about these threads/topics too. I've been wanting "new blood" to weigh in some of these threads for some time now, because many of us have gone around these circles enough times to know exactly where everyone is coming from, without a bit of change. Ergo my Cement Theory...
I can't really say that what you or others believe really matters to me either, except perhaps as people begin to veer into other people's lanes with their beliefs. AKA impose their beliefs on others.
Otherwise, this back-and-forth is for the most part simply exchange of opinion. An intellectual exercise, though futile and little more than a waste of time for me before I get going with my day soon after. No more and no less. Though more often than not it does seem like a lot less...
In reading the last few posts, including this one of yours, I tried to think back throughout my life of religious questioning (from my methodist to my catholic to my Buddhist/atheist) years, and how often did I "go off" on a religion or a religious person.
And the answer -- without exception -- is when the "other person" starts advocating for a particular religion.
It's when I can't sit down and say hello to a Mormon without the proselytization.
It's when I can't walk the river trail from just south of National Airport up to the Lincoln Memorial without a bible thumper harassing me.
It's when catholics take up my street and standing on my lawn protesting that which cannot be named.
It's when my best friend from high school says he can no longer associate with me unless I convert from Buddhist to Born Again.
It's when a parent or teacher demands we have a religious christmas pageant in our secular school.
It's when an HOA meeting has to begin with a 10 minute christian prayer.
It's when a parent demands we say a christian prayer every morning on the school's morning announcements.
It's when a choral teacher expects (for a grade) non-christian students sing christian hymns.
Need I go on?
On the other hand when I have a neighbor who is very religious who says, "Our church is having a choral concert. You're welcome to join us", I simply respond with a thank you and that I have other plans.
Or when another religious neighbor invites to her church's luncheon for seniors or the annual church play, I thank her and accept the invitation.
Or when traveling I visit religious places -- churches, cathedrals, etc.
Now this forum presents more of dilemma. People come here to talk about their religious beliefs. And they must anticipate that other posters will react. If they can't handle that, they should go elsewhere. It's sort of along the lines of, "Well, since you brought it up..."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
