A lot of Atheist and agnostics just don't get it

[ding]

I don't know any 3 year olds that understand any religious or spiritual concepts.

You mean like right and wrong?

I'm not sure I'd consider them religious or spiritual concepts, they are cultural. It's been awhile since my kids were 3 but I think they understood right and wrong at the most basic level, e.g., don't stick your finger in an outlet..

The definition of Natural Law which is also known as the Law of Right and Wrong and the Moral Law is a body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct. As determined by nature, the law of nature is implied to be objective and universal; it exists independently of human understanding and is very much a foundation of all religions.

 

[Taz]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

I just see no solid proof. All you have is faith, which is the belief of something that you know isn't proven.

 

[Mike Dwight]

So Wait! You're a Calvinist?!…. So you... You Personally Are a Calvinist?! You really think you are Calvinist? You're telling me that something unknowable can't be sort of the side some parents put on their babies? Wait that makes you a Baptist. Oh, my fault. That's good. Well your 3 year old Alang couldn't really make a good investment in the Afterlife until around 16. Its a little more complicated than outlets, ok?

 

[badger2]

ding is nuts smuggling morality into Nature. The physicists attempt to anthropomorphize the hands of a clock, campbell's soup cans, dogs, etc. The argument for something coming from nothing is a concept easily anthro'ed. Hawking et al's imaginary time links to a parallel found in Stockman's The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America, p.261-2:

'During nearly two decades at the helm, Martin learned that the only thing the Fed could roughly gauge was the level of bank reserves in the system. Beyond that there simply weren't any fixed arithmetic ratios. starting with the "money multiplier." The latter measured the ratio between bank reserves, which are potential money, and bank deposits, which are actual money, As previously indicated, however, commercial banks don't create actual money (checking account deposits) directly; they make loans and then credit the proceeds to customer accounts. So the transmission process between bank reserves and money supply wends through bank lending departments and the credit creation process.'

 

[rightwinger]

Seen the religious arguments, they just didn’t work with me

Put in the same box as astrology, ghosts, reincarnation, unicorns and fairies

So that is your choice. No argument here. Believing or not is a choice you get to make.

Agrée

 

[badger2]

#21: xian street preachers use trolling frequently. In some circles it's called evangelization. It attempts to introduce lack where there's nothing but abundance, troubled spirit, guilt, resentment, etc. with which to establish its power.

I Truth, lie.
(Jacques Lacan)

 

[RodISHI]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

I just see no solid proof. All you have is faith, which is the belief of something that you know isn't proven.

I have all the proof I need for me. You will have to find your own.

 

[Taz]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

I just see no solid proof. All you have is faith, which is the belief of something that you know isn't proven.

I have all the proof I need for me. You will have to find your own.

Your concession is duly noted.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I have all the proof I need for me.

Which is precisely why it is not proof or evidence. It's okay, you can just call it "faith", I.E., belief without evidence. March under your true flag.

 

[RodISHI]

So Wait! You're a Calvinist?!…. So you... You Personally Are a Calvinist?! You really think you are Calvinist? You're telling me that something unknowable can't be sort of the side some parents put on their babies? Wait that makes you a Baptist. Oh, my fault. That's good. Well your 3 year old Alang couldn't really make a good investment in the Afterlife until around 16. Its a little more complicated than outlets, ok?

You put labels on people?

Please explain how you believe in this "complicated outlet" theory of yours.

 

[Taz]

So Wait! You're a Calvinist?!…. So you... You Personally Are a Calvinist?! You really think you are Calvinist? You're telling me that something unknowable can't be sort of the side some parents put on their babies? Wait that makes you a Baptist. Oh, my fault. That's good. Well your 3 year old Alang couldn't really make a good investment in the Afterlife until around 16. Its a little more complicated than outlets, ok?

You put labels on people?

Please explain how you believe in this "complicated outlet" theory of yours.

He has all the reasons he needs for himself. Move along.

 

[RodISHI]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

I just see no solid proof. All you have is faith, which is the belief of something that you know isn't proven.

I have all the proof I need for me. You will have to find your own.

Your concession is duly noted.

That is not a concession dummy that is telling you that it is up to you or anyone who doesn't believe and refuses to examine themselves in truth to find whatever proof you/they think you/they may need is totally up to you or them. Not me or anyone else.

I was given mine before you were a twinkle in your daddy's eyes and do not have a problem helping to edify others in their faith and beliefs who are like minded.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I was given mine before you were a twinkle in your daddy's eyes a

I.e., brainwashed as a child.

 

[MaryL]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

Ever hear of Pascal's wager? Look it up. OK. My problem with that is, IF you are better off presuming a supernal creator exists, that opens up an other issue: Which religion actually represents the Devine creator? How are we to determine which is the actual from the false? Because there are an number of variables that can't be determined. So if Pascal was alive, I would ask him to redefine the logic behind his assertion.

 

[RodISHI]

So Wait! You're a Calvinist?!…. So you... You Personally Are a Calvinist?! You really think you are Calvinist? You're telling me that something unknowable can't be sort of the side some parents put on their babies? Wait that makes you a Baptist. Oh, my fault. That's good. Well your 3 year old Alang couldn't really make a good investment in the Afterlife until around 16. Its a little more complicated than outlets, ok?

You put labels on people?

Please explain how you believe in this "complicated outlet" theory of yours.

He has all the reasons he needs for himself. Move along.

He can get his own thread if he doesn't like the idea of being questioned for clarification. Why don't you move along and troll someone who may be interested in your diatribe.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

He can get his own thread if he doesn't like the idea of being questioned for clarification.

Well that's whiny and dumb. Of course, the person starting the thread and making claims should be the one explaining himself.

 

[RodISHI]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

Ever hear of Pascal's wager? Look it up. OK. My problem with that is, IF you are better off presuming a supernal creator exists, that opens up an other issue: Which religion actually represents the Devine creator? How are we to determine which is the actual from the false? Because there are an number of variables that can't be determined. So if Pascal was alive, I would ask him to redefine the logic behind his assertion.

No. I'd have to look it up.


I don't belong to an religious organizations so couldn't tell you on that end. I've seen good and bad preachers both. Good and bad things all around so choose that which is good and pass on that which you feel is bad.

 

[RodISHI]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

Ever hear of Pascal's wager? Look it up. OK. My problem with that is, IF you are better off presuming a supernal creator exists, that opens up an other issue: Which religion actually represents the Devine creator? How are we to determine which is the actual from the false? Because there are an number of variables that can't be determined. So if Pascal was alive, I would ask him to redefine the logic behind his assertion.

How would you be able to bet with a life you are unaware of or do not believe that it exist?

Pascal's wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist, Blaise Pascal (1623–1662). It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Pascal's wager is overwrought, contrived, and stupid. For one, he didn't cover all the bases.

What if you picked the wrong religion?

What if god doesn't like people who believe in him, because he knows he never gave those dishonest fools any evidence? Maybe he makes them suffer for eternity, and accepts the non believers into "heaven".

What if heaven is actually eternal suffering, and god is actually an evil entity who fooled believers into giving him their souls forever?

Pascal wasn't very imaginative.

 

[MaryL]

It appears from all that they post here that they cannot perceive the Spirit that calls forth, comforts and keeps those who remain in faith and believe.

When truth is diligently sought it can open doors unimaginable.

Ever hear of Pascal's wager? Look it up. OK. My problem with that is, IF you are better off presuming a supernal creator exists, that opens up an other issue: Which religion actually represents the Devine creator? How are we to determine which is the actual from the false? Because there are an number of variables that can't be determined. So if Pascal was alive, I would ask him to redefine the logic behind his assertion.

How would you be able to bet with a life you are unaware of or do not believe that it exist?

Pascal's wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist, Blaise Pascal (1623–1662). It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

I know that, but say, even an atheist's short life matters to them, to who's benefit is it to believe in the afterlife or religious protocols when it can't be proven to matter in one human beings lifetime? Surely it can't be a cheap philosophical hedge as Pascal proposes?