Boss
Take a Memo:
- Thread starter
- #721
The thread has failed. This thread like your others has been a vehicle for your proselytizing as a way to promote to your version of some new fangled religion. As a L. Ron Hubbard wannabe, yeah, the thread fails.Your argument means nothing. The amount of responses mean nothing.
Gawd is time, gawd is love, gawd is this flower I'm holding in my hand, gawd is nature, gawd is vengeance, gawd is mercy, gawd is whatever you create him/her/it to be.
Well, Hollie claimed my thread failed, but the measure of any thread is the number of views and replies. I merely pointed out that my thread had not "failed" by established parameters for measuring success of threads on any forum. In contrast, this thread has more replies and views than the combined total of her last 20 threads. That's not about the argument, it's about the success or failure of the thread as a thread.
Now, it just so happens that my argument was bulletproof and no one has been able to refute it. Oh, they have rejected it, refused to try and counter it, attempted to change the subject numerous times, interjected emotive opinions... but the point of the OP still stands irrefutable.
In your final paragraph, all you are stating is that God relies on faith. I have no problem with that. My OP doesn't challenge it or try to establish scientific proof for God. The belief in God certainly requires faith and God is whatever you believe God is. So is the instant of present time.... that's the OP argument. We have a perception of present time, we cannot observe it. We rely on our faith in what we perceive to be reality in the present. Nothing is perceived instantly without time happening... it defies physics.
Your insistence of some new fangled version of physics as supporting your argument for religious faith being required to perceive the present, well, yeah, that argument is absent support so yeah, that was a failure also.
Well no, the thread hasn't failed by any standard we measure threads on forums. The argument presented in the OP has not been refuted and there is really no counter argument. You keep wanting to talk about religion and I am not religious so I can't talk to you about that, except to say the thread is not a religious argument and this isn't a theological discussion. I've not promoted any new religion or "newfangled physics" with anything I've presented in this thread.
If you comprehend that light has to travel and anything that "happens" requires time, then it's clear you can understand that our perception of the present isn't happening in the moment of the present. I don't need newfangled physics, just the regular kind. We rely on faith that the moment of present is as we perceive. Because of physics, it is impossible for us to observe the present.
Faith is faith is faith... there is no special "religious" faith which has it's own rules. To have faith is to believe in something not observable, testable or measurable. It applies to God and it applies to the Present.