Stop teaching morons that Christianity has a monopoly on virtue

BidenPresident said:
Jesus taught people should pray in public. Is there a single Christian on the planet who believes that?!
Click to expand...

Jesus did not condemn communal prayer.......he condemned prayer intended to promote self-righteousness.....
Luke 18:10-14 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
Click to expand...

both men prayed in public......it was the words that Jesus condemned, not the act.....
 
Cypress said:
I cannot categorically disprove a strictly materialistic and reductionist view of the universe.

Maybe we are nothing more than a collection of quarks and leptons, and there is no deeper meaning in life.

I do not deny that is a possibility, but it strikes me as fairly cynical.

Physical matter and energy obey very district mathematical laws of nature.

Biological systems do not seem to boil down to a mathematical equation. Biology cannot be reduced to physics.

Biological systems and consciousness are complex emergent properties which seemingly do not follow a simple mathematical law in the way particle physics and gravity do. That is part of the mystery to me, and it suggests to me that life is more than just the sum of it's parts.
Click to expand...

I think therefore I am


Life has no meaning without thought


Until a mind imbues it with meaning


I imbue meaning into my life

Even if no other being did


Because I imbued meaning into my life


life has meaning

Because I created a meaning for it


And I’m not the only one


And I’m not the first
 
evince said:
I think therefore I am


Life has no meaning without thought


Until a mind imbues it with meaning


I imbue meaning into my life

Even if no other being did


Because I imbued meaning into my life


life has meaning

Because I created a meaning for it


And I’m not the only one


And I’m not the first
Click to expand...

Nietzsche, who was famously atheist, maintained that one could create meaning by treating one's life like a work of art.

That is a good point, but it is only peripheral to what I was wondering about. Emergent biological properties and consciousness cannot be obtained simply by putting together a collection of quarks and electrons.

We can describe life, emergent biological properties, consciousness. But there really is no mathematics, no equations, no fundamental physics explaining how quarks and leptons are animated into emergent biological properties and ultimately to consciousness.

Maybe someday we will learn that all matter and energy, whether inanimate or living, can be explained by a purely reductionist and materialistic approach. But for now, it remains an incomprehensible mystery to me and seemingly suggests life is more than the sum of it's parts.
 
Cypress said:
Nietzsche, who was famously atheist, maintained that one could create meaning by treating one's life like a work of art.

That is a good point, but it is only peripheral to what I was wondering about. Emergent biological properties and consciousness cannot be obtained simply by putting together a collection of quarks and electrons.

We can describe life, emergent biological properties, consciousness. But there really is no mathematics, no equations, no fundamental physics explaining how quarks and leptons are animated into emergent biological properties and ultimately to consciousness.

Maybe someday we will learn that all matter and energy, whether inanimate or living, can be explained by a purely reductionist and materialistic approach. But for now, it remains an incomprehensible mystery to me and seemingly suggests life is more than the sum of it's parts.
Click to expand...

Nothing mysterious about life. No more than mountains or black holes.
 
Life is more than we can currently calculate

When we know enough it will be explainable by all fields

Even math

That’s what I believe anyway
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Cypress,



I agree with you. My apologies if I appeared to be conflating religion with Christianity. That was not my intent. I do see a lot of overlap because most of my experience with religion comes from Christians trying to push their religion on me. They do it both intentionally and out of habit. One very common instance of this is if I sneeze, I do not need to be blessed. I don't appreciate it. And I have struggled with how to respond to that. There doesn't seem to be a polite way to get my point across that a sneeze is a biological event and need not invoke an assumption of sharing religion.

There is no polite way to respond to that with: "keep your religion to yourself, thanks," "Ah go bless yourself," or "No thank you, I do not care to be blessed," or "Being blessed is meaningless to me, so you have just said something meaningless to me."

If an atheist tries to say anything at all to communicate the fact that they do not appreciate being blessed after sneezing, it comes off as rude. This is how presumptuous Christians can be. Like, if you don't share their religion there's something wrong with you.



Humans would not be so attracted to religion if they didn't have such a hard selling campaign going on. But since they do, it is a very logical assumption that religion will not be going away any time soon. One particularly irksome thing about religion is most of them command their subjects to have as many babies as possible. That's because most religious subjects are indoctrinated into the religion not by choice but by constant brainwashing during upbringing while they are most vulnerable to being told things that may not be true.

More babies in religious families ensures the religion will continue. The religion does not endure on merit alone, but by cult design.

Having too many babies is self-destructive for humanity. It may have begun back when there just weren't that many humans on the planet, and back then it was a good idea to have lots, but that time has passed. There are now too many humans on the planet, and religion has not changed to reflect that. The scriptures are never amended. That is a huge problem for religion. No wonder they say the meek shall inherit the Earth. Religions force it to happen by telling the poor to have too many babies.

The more modern the planet gets, the less relevant religion is; because it never changes.
Click to expand...

The bless you thing to me is just their intent


They intended it as a kindness


I just accept that kindness


It translates to me as “I hope you are not sick because I care about you”


I even say it myself to people


As that is what it means to me


I’m an atheist
 
BidenPresident said:
Nothing mysterious about life. No more than mountains or black holes.
Click to expand...

Black holes are predicted and explained by the mathematics of general relativity.

Mountains are explained by the mathematics of isostasy.

We have no mathematics or comprehensive physical theory explaining how emergent biological properties and consciousness arise from collections of quarks and electrons.


Maybe someday we will have a quantum explanation for emergent biological properties and consciousness.

For know, we are just arm-waving.
 
Cypress said:
Black holes are predicted and explained by the mathematics of general relativity.

Mountains are explained by the mathematics of isostasy.

We have no mathematics or comprehensive physical theory explaining how emergent biological properties and consciousness arise from collections of quarks and electrons.


Maybe someday we will have a quantum explanation for emergent biological properties and consciousness.

For know, we are just arm-waving.
Click to expand...

Emergence is not a good explanation. The possibility of life existed at the Big Bang. Life is no more mysterious than anything else about the universe.
 
Micawber said:
This Marjorie Taylor Greene meltdown reveals an uncomfortable truth about Christianity (msn.com)

[FONT="]“You should practice the basic thing you're taught in church: respect your neighbor,” Dingell shouted. Greene blasted back, “Taught in church, are you kidding me? Try being a Christian and supporting life!" Dingell responded, “You try being a Christian... and try treating your colleagues decently!”[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Dingell thinks being a Christian means being neighborly and civil. Greene thinks being a Christian means attacking anyone who supports abortion rights. But they both agree that being a Christian is morally good, and that Christianity is virtuous.[/FONT]
Click to expand...

baby serial killers should not expect civility. Democrats love criminals, always have, always will
 
Hello evince,

evince said:
The bless you thing to me is just their intent


They intended it as a kindness


I just accept that kindness


It translates to me as “I hope you are not sick because I care about you”


I even say it myself to people


As that is what it means to me


I’m an atheist
Click to expand...

Well if you say it then you are spreading the religion, justifying it, reinforcing it.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello evince,



Well if you say it then you are spreading the religion, justifying it, reinforcing it.
Click to expand...


I’m don’t think so


Many of my atheist friends say it too


Just like lots of people say OH MY GOD when they are surprised by something
 
Cypress said:
If you narrowly define religion as the fundamentalist American Protestant version of biblical literalism and biblical inerrancy, I agree that version is generally an anathema to scientific inquiry.

My point is that religious traditions are far more broad and nuanced than the typical caricature of the bible thumpers we would like to hold out for ridicule and punishment
.
Religious faith can be rational. Rational does not mean it has to be objectively true. It just means it is a belief that is rational to hold based on life experience, even if empirical data is absent.

Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome Project and one of the world's leading geneticists is a devout Christian, and I do not doubt he is a reasonable and rational person.

Max Stackhouse defined religion as:



^^ I believe that type of religious conviction is going to be with humans for a long time, and I do not see it as fundamentally at odds with scientific inquiry.

I just believe Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus are going to be around for a very long time.
Click to expand...

NO worries, we will just have to agree to disagree, and I disagree with your venerable authorities also. Hey, Einstein flunked Algebra. (apocryphal?)

I'll go this far with you or them: I believe with great certainty that human perception is limited and that therefore phenomena exist that we are heretofore unaware. This fact is proven by the extension of our apprehension of phenomenon using tools, for example radio astronomy as a good one. I stand by 100% my belief that anyone who has a firm belief
beyond what man perceives with his senses alone, or as enhanced by technological tools, is being completely irrational in every instance that it is done, and
that is without any compromise or exception whatsoever. And I could care less if the person in error is named Dr Katsoulias or Krusty the Clown.

And this presents a paradox, by the way. I will only accept empirical evidence of anything, so whenever that magical pixie dust evidences itself it becomes part of
my natural world. ;) I have no problem whatsoever believing in a deity or a unicorn, (millions may be galloping behind me right now as I type) but I insist you show me one.
 
Last edited:
Micawber said:
NO worries, we will just have to agree to disagree, and I disagree with your venerable authorities also. Hey, Einstein flunked Algebra. (apocryphal?)

I'll go this far with you or them: I believe with great certainty that human perception is limited and that therefore phenomena exist that we are heretofore unaware. This fact is proven by the extension of our apprehension of phenomenon using tools, for example radio astronomy as a good one. I stand by 100% my belief that anyone who has a firm belief
beyond what man perceives with his senses alone, or as enhanced by technological tools, is being completely irrational in every instance that it is done, and
that is without any compromise or exception whatsoever. And I could care less if the person in error is named Dr Katsoulias or Krusty the Clown.

And this presents a paradox, by the way. I will only accept empirical evidence of anything, so whenever that magical pixie dust evidences itself it becomes part of
my natural world. ;) I have no problem whatsoever believing in a deity or a unicorn, (millions may be galloping behind me right now as I type) but I insist you show me one.
Click to expand...

I agree that there is a certain hubris in certainty.

Like the kind of steadfast certainty found both in dogmatic religion or hardcore atheism.

There are probably limits to our access to knowledge and truth based on the cognitive capacities of our primate brains.

On the flipside, I maintain there are many things humans can reasonably believe in which do not require empircal evidence or scientific experimentation. Even empiricism has it's limits.

The American and French Revolutions were based on the belief in a higher truth about natural law and natural rights. There was nothing emperical about that belief.

The Nazis were not prosecuted at Nuremberg on the basis of American, British, or German law. They were prosecuted based on the belief of a universal morality invoked by natural law.

There is no scientific experiment anyone can run which would empirically support the allies claim of a universal moral authority which superceded national laws and public opinion.

The moral of the story for me is that there are plenty of things humans can reasonably believe in which cannot be proven by empiricism or sensory perception.
 
Cypress said:
I agree that there is a certain hubris in certainty.

Like the kind of steadfast certainty found both in dogmatic religion or hardcore atheism.

There are probably limits to our access to knowledge and truth based on the cognitive capacities of our primate brains.

On the flipside, I maintain there are many things humans can reasonably believe in which do not require empircal evidence or scientific experimentation. Even empiricism has it's limits.

The American and French Revolutions were based on the belief in a higher truth about natural law and natural rights. There was nothing emperical about that belief.

The Nazis were not prosecuted at Nuremberg on the basis of American, British, or German law. They were prosecuted based on the belief of a universal morality invoked by natural law.

There is no scientific experiment anyone can run which would empirically support the allies claim of a universal moral authority which superceded national laws and public opinion.

The moral of the story for me is that there are plenty of things humans can reasonably believe in which cannot be proven by empiricism or sensory perception.
Click to expand...

I believe you are conflating the concept of abstract reasoning with a verifiable fact about the natural world. I never asserted, nor do I assert that abstract reasoning
such as creating law, including natural law, is irrational. They can be. Ideas can be reasoned or without any reason. The reason should be based in the natural world.
Non empirically based superstitious beliefs do not appeal to anything in the natural world, by definition. Ideas that are abstractions and are created in my mind have a chemical existence
in the brain. I do not contend that they do not exist, whether irrational or rational. Again, at risk of beating a dead horse, I disagree with your final sentence.
I draw a distinction between belief and knowledge.
You simply choose to believe some things, I assume, without any proof. I call that an irrational belief. You must possess a better God antennae than do I. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top