There is no conflict between religion and science. Never has been.

[ding]

No, you must take some responsibility for how you come across on this forum as well.

I can’t control how other people perceive me. If your perception of me is causing you to be biased and you blame me for that, you are literally transferring your control or power to me. In effect you are saying you aren’t responsible for your actions. I am.

 

[ding]

But I suspect you are the kind of person who NEVER takes personal responsibility for your behavior.

I’m ok with you believing that. It’s not correct, but it’s not my job to convince you. That’s on you, not me.

Most people don’t realize the account of the fall of man in Genesis wasn’t about disobeying God, it was about man not taking accountability for his actions.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is “something “ (which in reality is “no thing”)

That isn't a solution. That's just another step in the unknown list.

which has always existed.

Special pleading. You seem to have constructed a word game in the form of "no thing". And then treated that as if it is something which does not follow.

If you say "no thing" pre-existed the origin of the universe it is hard to debate that, but it also doesn't technically mean much of anything. Certainly "nothing" lacks intent or will or capability of doing anything.

So are there any examples or analogs for “something “ (which in reality is “no thing”) which are eternal and unchanging that aren’t energy/matter?

I honestly don't know how you think you "know" this.

It turns out there is. Truth is discovered.

Just a tick here: what you are effectively saying is that concepts like "a thing is what it is and not some other thing" is a "thing". That it is somehow able to create a universe?

So it is possible for “something” (which in reality is “no thing”) to be eternal and unchanging.

Let me get this straight. You think that because "X = X" is true that means that abstract concepts of identity created the universe?

I hope you see that this doesn't actually provide any explanation whatsoever. It seems mostly just word games and new age thinking.

I mean if it gives YOU some comfort in the universe then cool. But it is not, ipso facto, the superior explanation because in the end you are not providing any really valuable explanation for anything.

 

[ding]

What an insipid and meaningless answer.


But par for your course.

How is it ever insipid or meaningless to investigate the evidence at one’s disposal?

I suspect it’s more likely that you only said that because you can’t fathom there being any evidence whatsoever to test the question was the creation of existence intentional or an accidental happenstance of matter/energy doing what matter/energy do.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I can’t control how other people perceive me.

You can. You choose not to.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Most people don’t realize the account of the fall of man in Genesis wasn’t about disobeying God, it was about man not taking accountability for his actions.

I actually agree with you! I think the Genesis account of the Fall is a great metaphor for "growing up". As a child you are free to do things without taking any responsibility of knowing if it is right or wrong. But once you know right from wrong (the tree is actually the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil"), once you eat of that fruit you are now on the hook to take responsibility for all your decisions and actions.

That is the pain of growing up.

I actually quite like that reading of "The Fall".

 

[ding]

That isn't a solution. That's just another step in the unknown list.Special pleading. You seem to have constructed a word game in the form of "no thing". And then treated that as if it is something which does not follow. If you say "no thing" pre-existed the origin of the universe it is hard to debate that, but it also doesn't technically mean much of anything. Certainly "nothing" lacks intent or will or capability of doing anything. I honestly don't know how you think you "know" this. Just a tick here: what you are effectively saying is that concepts like "a thing is what it is and not some other thing" is a "thing". That it is somehow able to create a universe? Let me get this straight. You think that because "X = X" is true that means that abstract concepts of identity created the universe? I hope you see that this doesn't actually provide any explanation whatsoever. It seems mostly just word games and new age thinking. I mean if it gives YOU some comfort in the universe then cool. But it is not, ipso facto, the superior explanation because in the end you are not providing any really valuable explanation for anything.

Until you understand the details of how the universe was created from nothing and until you recognize there is evidence at our disposal to investigate the question was the creation of existence intentional, you will never be able to understand anything I am saying.

If the universe popping into existence hardwired to produce intelligence isn’t enough to peak your curiosity and set aside your bias to objectively analyze the evidence at your disposal, there’s nothing I can say that will change your mind.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

No. I only see an unending chain of causes as a dead end.

When you propose a "first uncaused cause" you are actually NOT providing any information. You are simply unilaterally decreeing something to be THE first uncaused cause.

The usual critique of Aquinas' "First Uncaused Cause" argument is "where did THAT cause come from?"

It's a philosophically weak position. You are better off using Anselm's Ontological Argument which has at its core the problem of "existence" being an "optional" feature of a thing.

 

[ding]

You can. You choose not to.

No. I have no power over anyone but myself. No matter how many times you try to give me your power.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Until you understand how the universe was created from nothing and until you recognize there is evidence at our disposal to investigate the the question was the creation of existence intentional, you will never be able to understand anything I am saying.

That is a religious claim. YOU have no special knowledge that I do not have. You have YOUR preferred philosophy which YOU like, but not everyone does. That does not mean that your religious/philosophical position is by definition correct.

If the universe popping into existence hardwired to produce intelligence isn’t enough to peak your curiosity and set aside your bias to objectively analyze the evidence at your disposal, there’s nothing I can say that will change your mind.

That is exactly how religious people debate this kind of thing. "MY beliefs are perfect and if they fail to convince you it is because YOU are flawed."

That is a weakness of religious thought. It cannot bear the concept that it might be in error. Not that I am saying you are in error, just that simply telling people they are unable to understand you doesn't mean they are failing. Sometimes it means the person doing the speaking is failing.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

No. I have no power over anyone but myself.

But you still like to play the troll game so clearly you like to have an impact on people.


I wish you could be honest about something at some point.

 

[ding]

That is a religious claim. YOU have no special knowledge that I do not have. You have YOUR preferred philosophy which YOU like, but not everyone does. That does not mean that your religious/philosophical position is by definition correct.



That is exactly how religious people debate this kind of thing. "MY beliefs are perfect and if they fail to convince you it is because YOU are flawed."

That is a weakness of religious thought. It cannot bear the concept that it might be in error. Not that I am saying you are in error, just that simply telling people they are unable to understand you doesn't mean they are failing. Sometimes it means the person doing the speaking is failing.

Again… Until you understand the details of how the universe was created from nothing and until you recognize there is evidence at our disposal to investigate the question was the creation of existence intentional, you will never be able to understand anything I am saying.

If the universe popping into existence hardwired to produce intelligence isn’t enough to peak your curiosity and set aside your bias to objectively analyze the evidence at your disposal, there’s nothing I can say that will change your mind.

 

[ding]

But you still like to play the troll game so clearly you like to have an impact on people.


I wish you could be honest about something at some point.

Again… Until you understand the details of how the universe was created from nothing and until you recognize there is evidence at our disposal to investigate the question was the creation of existence intentional, you will never be able to understand anything I am saying.

If the universe popping into existence hardwired to produce intelligence isn’t enough to peak your curiosity and set aside your bias to objectively analyze the evidence at your disposal, there’s nothing I can say that will change your mind.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Again… Until you understand the details of how the universe was created from nothing and until you recognize there is evidence at our disposal to investigate the question was the creation of existence intentional, you will never be able to understand anything I am saying.

Trust me when I tell you: YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW THE UNIVERSE WAS FORMED. I know that sounds shocking but it's true.

You have your PHILOSOPHY. If it fails to gain someone else's belief then it could be that you are wrong about how compelling it is.

If the universe popping into existence hardwired to produce intelligence isn’t enough to peak your curiosity and set aside your bias to objectively analyze the evidence at your disposal, there’s nothing I can say that will change your mind.

Well, you could come up with a more philosophically robust explanation.

 

[BreezeWood]

Why anyone should concern themselves with the religion of other people is beyond me.

- because they have no desire for justice rendered for the criminal events they represent ... the desert religions.

being the crucifier themselves - bing.

too bad for them, the 1st century events of liberation theology, self determination will last as long as a single spirit continues the path of the prescribed religion of antiquity the crucifiers tried to kill.

 

[Cougarbear]

while your waiting maybe you can locate the etched tablets from heaven with their 10 commandments - that never existed than in your c bible, book of forgeries and fallacies - and the other two desert religions.

Ya, the great ten commandments that solve all the world's problems. Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart and love thy neighbor as thyself. You would like to get rid of them because to atheists, there is no morals and ethics that are unalienable rights. Instead, whatever floats someone's boat is okay as long as 51% of the population goes for it. Or, if 10% go for it but the population is lead by tyrannists like the Biden Clan, then nope. The other smart 90% have to suffer. 99.999% of the population have to suffer with child abuse through transgenderism because a few people force it upon others.

 

[BreezeWood]

I can’t control how other people perceive me.

You can. You choose not to.

oh, really ... you think they are being bashful -

from how far away ...

 

[BreezeWood]

No. I have no power over anyone but myself. No matter how many times you try to give me your power.

sure bing ...

- you just blend in with your congregation and everything is just fine, people can be whatever they want to be.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

oh, really ... you think they are being bashful -

View attachment 658796

from how far away ...

I honestly wish I was able to figure out what this post means in relation to the quoted post of mine it was in response to.

 

[BreezeWood]

I honestly wish I was able to figure out what this post means in relation to the quoted post of mine it was in response to.

I can’t control how other people perceive me. If your perception of me is causing you to be biased and you blame me for that, you are literally transferring your control or power to me. In effect you are saying you aren’t responsible for your actions. I am.

You can. You choose not to.

stopped reading the dialogue between you two though with your post realized you did return to the subject matter - sortof - - really just spotted a typical self ingratiating bing response ... so it really was not in response to your response.