(April 14, 2017 at 8:49 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(April 14, 2017 at 8:35 am)ignoramus Wrote: Infinite regress just forces the special pleading fallacy ... and it's goes downhill from there... hehe

Please explain... how does infinite regress force special pleading?

"Allah did it" ok, explain Allah. If Allah is complex and everything has a cause, then something even more complex than Allah created Allah. OH suddenly that gap answer doesn't fill in that gap for you? 

Now apply that same logic to your own pet deity claim. You might as well be filling in that gap with a giant invisible pink unicorn and it also would suffer the same problem.

We could care less which god of the gap you assume, it is all in your head, nowhere else but your own wishful thinking.

Probably the sound of one hand clapping.

(April 14, 2017 at 9:03 am)Whateverist Wrote: Probably the sound of one hand clapping.

I do real things with my hands, I don't put them together and pretend I am talking to a fictional being.

(April 14, 2017 at 8:43 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(April 13, 2017 at 8:20 pm)emjay Wrote: Yes, and I guess one of mine is a kind of follow on from that; in putting humans at the centre of the universe like that, it doesn't take into account that humans are flawed. Man created in God's image? If so then God has mood swings, confirmation bias, makes bad emotional decisions etc. What I'm saying is it paints humans as entirely superior to animals... 'the rational animal' and it's simply not true (imo). We're not perfect and most of our decisions and beliefs are influenced by emotion to some degree or another, even when we are being rational.

Your son is created in your image that doesn't mean that he is smarter as you are at his age.
He will grow smarter of course but that it takes time.
The same thing goes for human beings before they emancipated to God level.
They will grow smarter and smarter like God but that takes time.

I guess you never thought about that Em, did you?  


(color mine)

Do you picture God as being perfectly rational then (ie non-emotional)? Or do you picture God as being like a Buddha in perpetual meditation... at total peace and free from all attachment? To be clear I was referring to the Christian religion when I said what you highlighted. You seem to defend all versions of God, regardless of religion... do you see them as one and the same? Because if you do mean something like the second, then the Christian God offers nothing towards that; just a bunch of orders but no guidance as to how to carry it out... 'love your enemy' yet throughout history they go and kill all their enemies. At least with Buddhism and suchlike there is clear and logical guidance on how to achieve the peace of non-attachment. So I can't see how you can see them as the same?

Muslim=I like what I was sold.
Jew=I like what I was sold.
Christian=I like what I was sold.
Buddhist=I like what I was sold.
Hindu=I like what I was sold.

Awesome, good for you, but do humanity a favor STOP pretending your club is the source of our species goodness. Nobody has any universal and neutral method to prove these clubs are anything more than human invented clubs.

Skeptics don't hate every religious individual, but do not expect us to blindly swallow your club because you open your mouth and utter something or type it and hit submit. GET IN LINE TAKE A NUMBER. You are NOT the center of the planet and neither is your religion.

The hats worn by professional religionists. No Creatrix of the universe would require her acolytes to don such idiotic head gear.

Boru

(April 14, 2017 at 9:14 am)emjay Wrote:

(April 14, 2017 at 8:43 am)Little Rik Wrote: Your son is created in your image that doesn't mean that he is smarter as you are at his age.
He will grow smarter of course but that it takes time.
The same thing goes for human beings before they emancipated to God level.
They will grow smarter and smarter like God but that takes time.

I guess you never thought about that Em, did you?  


(color mine)

Do you picture God as being perfectly rational then (ie non-emotional)? Or do you picture God as being like a Buddha in perpetual meditation... at total peace and free from all attachment? To be clear I was referring to the Christian religion when I said what you highlighted. You seem to defend all versions of God, regardless of religion... do you see them as one and the same? Because if you do mean something like the second, then the Christian God offers nothing towards that; just a bunch of orders but no guidance as to how to carry it out... 'love your enemy' yet throughout history they go and kill all their enemies. At least with Buddhism and suchlike there is clear and logical guidance on how to achieve the peace of non-attachment. So I can't see how you can see them as the same?

I do not follow religions.
I instead follow logic.
We do not know who wrote the Bible.
Certainly not the Christian that came much later.
I am not an expert in Bible so I can not say whether what is written in the Bible is all truth all rubbish or some is true and some is rubbish in any case I take what make sense as good and what doesn't as bad.
That sentence that say.........Man created in God's image.......make a lot of sense that is why I explained to you my point.

Yo mama.

(April 14, 2017 at 9:18 am)Brian37 Wrote: Muslim=I like what I was sold.
Jew=I like what I was sold.
Christian=I like what I was sold.
Buddhist=I like what I was sold.
Hindu=I like what I was sold.

Awesome, good for you, but do humanity a favor STOP pretending your club is the source of our species goodness. Nobody has any universal and neutral method to prove these clubs are anything more than human invented clubs.

Skeptics don't hate every religious individual, but do not expect us to blindly swallow your club because you open your mouth and utter something or type it and hit submit. GET IN LINE TAKE A NUMBER. You are NOT the center of the planet and neither is your religion.

I can't tell whether you're raging against me in all of this and it's making me paranoid. For the record, as I said, I'm not a Buddhist... but I do 'like what I was sold' to the extent that I agree with it but just as like what I was sold with any psychological theory or whatever that I agree with. Course I can get pissed if I think it's being misrepresented, but I think you'd be the same if you perceived someone misrepresenting ABBA (I'm afraid
I can't do that, cos they're cool ). Anyway, I don't think it's the source of humanity's goodness... indeed it goes very much against human nature... just a tool to reduce suffering by stepping back from shit... ie stepping back from 'attachment' to things or emotional states like anger. As you can see I'm not that good at it (at least right now), but that varies, and a better Buddhist simply would not care at all what other others thought about them... whether they were misrepresented etc... because that's what non-attachment leads to. So I'm not trying to sell it to you, just responding to a perceived attack... but at the same time, aware that that is attachment (to anger, pride etc) and therefore something I should let go for my own good... it's just harder sometimes than others, and I'm more self-aware/mindful sometimes than others.

---

(April 14, 2017 at 9:44 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(April 14, 2017 at 9:14 am)emjay Wrote: Do you picture God as being perfectly rational then (ie non-emotional)? Or do you picture God as being like a Buddha in perpetual meditation... at total peace and free from all attachment? To be clear I was referring to the Christian religion when I said what you highlighted. You seem to defend all versions of God, regardless of religion... do you see them as one and the same? Because if you do mean something like the second, then the Christian God offers nothing towards that; just a bunch of orders but no guidance as to how to carry it out... 'love your enemy' yet throughout history they go and kill all their enemies. At least with Buddhism and suchlike there is clear and logical guidance on how to achieve the peace of non-attachment. So I can't see how you can see them as the same?

I do not follow religions.
I instead follow logic.
We do not know who wrote the Bible.
Certainly not the Christian that came much later.
I am not an expert in Bible so I can not say whether what is written in the Bible is all truth all rubbish or some is true and some is rubbish in any case I take what make sense as good and what doesn't as bad.
That sentence that say.........Man created in God's image.......make a lot of sense that is why I explained to you my point.

Thanks for your answer. I understand what you're saying.

(April 14, 2017 at 9:44 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(April 14, 2017 at 9:14 am)emjay Wrote: Do you picture God as being perfectly rational then (ie non-emotional)? Or do you picture God as being like a Buddha in perpetual meditation... at total peace and free from all attachment? To be clear I was referring to the Christian religion when I said what you highlighted. You seem to defend all versions of God, regardless of religion... do you see them as one and the same? Because if you do mean something like the second, then the Christian God offers nothing towards that; just a bunch of orders but no guidance as to how to carry it out... 'love your enemy' yet throughout history they go and kill all their enemies. At least with Buddhism and suchlike there is clear and logical guidance on how to achieve the peace of non-attachment. So I can't see how you can see them as the same?

I do not follow religions.
I instead follow logic.
We do not know who wrote the Bible.
Certainly not the Christian that came much later.
I am not an expert in Bible so I can not say whether what is written in the Bible is all truth all rubbish or some is true and some is rubbish in any case I take what make sense as good and what doesn't as bad.
That sentence that say.........Man created in God's image.......make a lot of sense that is why I explained to you my point.

There are real people and real cities mentioned in the bible sure, but those mentions are there after the legends are spoken and by adding real names and places after the fact is a literary device to draw the reader in. It still does not make it true that humans have super powers or talk to the "otherworld". Plato's Apology mentions real people and real places but that does not make the Greek or Roman god's real. The original book Peter Pan mentions the city of London but that does not mean little boys can fly like that in reality.

It still remains that men DON'T magically pop out of dirt. It takes TWO sets of DNA to lead to a new pregnancy and humans do not survive the death myth as the bible would have you believe.