[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

There are also religions devoted to the unilateral destruction of modern culture and technological progress, doesn't make me sympathetic to the cause.

That's not the point here, nor does it excuse complete ignorance. Please mend that chip on your shoulder.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Status Quo

Like enlightenment rationalism and social engineering via hard scientists do social science invading all aspects of life?

Give up against the trinity. You can't be saved. Paper cut went from proselytizing Jesus to proselytizing the modern political faith.

[Paper_Cut]

Originally Posted by Status Quo

Can you comprehend what an infinitely expansive universe looks like?

Nobody said it was infinitely expansive...

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

That's not the point here, nor does it excuse complete ignorance. Please mend that chip on your shoulder.

It's not that I don't know, it's that I don't care to know. Religion in all cases has shown itself to infringe on human rights and retard the pursuit of scientific and social progress.
The fact of the matter is "allah" is a figment of human imagination, so he can either be described as what you think he is or he could be described as a bright pink, cross-eyed unicorn and he will be just as imaginary.

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

Give up against the trinity. You can't be saved. Paper cut went from proselytizing Jesus to proselytizing the modern political faith.

What do you mean by "modern political faith"? Do you mean science? Because that doesn't require faith, it has proof. Religion is the only paradigm which tells you that you must accept X, Y, and Z and you can't question or test them.

[Iamamartianchurch]

So by your logic, I can talk about whatever I want without having to get knowledgeable about that subject because I dont want to get knowledgeable?

For example.

I am allowed to say anything I want about the history of the Ottoman empire without knowing a damned thing about the ottoman empire?

Really it should follow that if I dont care about a subject, I shouldn't talk about it. Even further, if I don't know anything on a subject, I really shouldnt be speaking about it.

Right?


If your best answer is "I get to say ignorant things because I don't care" you don't belong here

[Paper_Cut]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

So by your logic, I can talk about whatever I want without having to get knowledgeable about that subject because I dont want to get knowledgeable?

For example.

I am allowed to say anything I want about the history of the Ottoman empire without knowing a damned thing about the ottoman empire?

Really it should follow that if I dont care about a subject, I shouldn't talk about it. Even further, if I don't know anything on a subject, I really shouldnt be speaking about it.

Right?


If your best answer is "I get to say ignorant things because I don't care" you don't belong here

No, because you can go look up the history of the ottoman empire, all you need to do is punch in "ottoman empire" into google and read the wiki article from start to finish; you'll be an expert by the time you're done.

Allah is some intangible figment of imagination, it doesn't matter who or what he, she, or it, is supposed to be: You have no evidence to support your claim in any form, therefore your claim is no longer a moot point.
Since you like metaphors, it would be like trying to memorize everything that "2+2" doesn't add to.

[LOL Renegade]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

Allah is some intangible figment of imagination

I'm pretty sure that depends on what your beliefs are.

[ProtoBaller1991]

Originally Posted by LOL Renegade

I'm pretty sure that depends on what your beliefs are.

Doesn't Allah just mean God in their language?

[LOL Renegade]

Originally Posted by ProtoBaller1991

Doesn't Allah just mean God in their language?

The God. Before Islam existed the word used to be a reference to a creator but now it refers to the sole God according to my research. Yes, I'm actually learning about this religion for once lol. Pretty cool so far.

[Paper_Cut]

Originally Posted by LOL Renegade

I'm pretty sure that depends on what your beliefs are.

Every morning I can believe there will be a new shiny red Ferrari waiting in my driveway when I walk out to leave for work but it won't make the Ferrari appear.

It takes more than believing something to make it true and it takes more than being convinced of something to make you an authority.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Yet, you can claim with certainty that God "is simply a construct of the human imagination"? Papercut, it takes more than believing something doesn't exist to make it true and it takes more than being convinced of a worldview to make you an authority (especially when you are clearly biased). Do you not see your own hypocrisy?

[LOL Renegade]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

Every morning I can believe there will be a new shiny red Ferrari waiting in my driveway when I walk out to leave for work but it won't make the Ferrari appear.

It takes more than believing something to make it true and it takes more than being convinced of something to make you an authority.

It's less about wanting something to happen and more about having faith in what you believe to be true based on your own perspective.

It takes more than believing something to make it true and it takes more than being convinced of something to make you an authority.

Like what? Being able to memorize the Qur'an? Is that enough to make someone an authority? Where do we draw the line?

[Paper_Cut]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

Yet, you can claim with certainty that God "is simply a construct of the human imagination"? Papercut, it takes more than believing something doesn't exist to make it true and it takes more than being convinced of a worldview to make you an authority (especially when you are clearly biased). Do you not see your own hypocrisy?

I have a stance I can back with evidence. I am biased, but you don't have to "have faith" in order to see any credibility in the logic.

Originally Posted by LOL Renegade

It's less about wanting something to happen and more about having faith in what you believe to be true based on your own perspective.



Like what? Being able to memorize the Qur'an? Is that enough to make someone an authority? Where do we draw the line?

How about when you provide some evidence that the Qur'an might be more than a 1400 year old poem written by an illiterate pedophile with a God complex.

[Status Quo (Banned)]

Then why haven't you provided any evidence?

You're just a normal troll.

[Status Quo (Banned)]

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/que...php?number=274

dealwithit

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

No, because you can go look up the history of the ottoman empire, all you need to do is punch in "ottoman empire" into google and read the wiki article from start to finish; you'll be an expert by the time you're done.

Allah is some intangible figment of imagination, it doesn't matter who or what he, she, or it, is supposed to be: You have no evidence to support your claim in any form, therefore your claim is no longer a moot point.
Since you like metaphors, it would be like trying to memorize everything that "2+2" doesn't add to.

It would appear that you are a fool. Since we aren't talking about the factuality of things, I merely posed to you an allegory. I could have very well used huckleberry Finn in place of the ottoman empire and it wouldn't change a thing.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

I have a stance I can back with evidence.

Please do so.

[Treghc]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

I have a stance I can back with evidence.

This should be interesting... An atheistic stance is by lack of evidence to convince, therefore not knowing, but simply not believing. What's your stance? And what's your evidence?

I am biased, but you don't have to "have faith" in order to see any credibility in the logic.

You do have to value logic, which is pretty darn close to faith. You can't tell somebody that doesn't value science that water is made of two Hydrogen atoms and one Oxygen atom.

You likely value science because you've experienced it's output in your life (you've experienced the changes scientific understanding provides). There are plenty of people out there who have experienced the changes religious understanding has provided them.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Status Quo

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/que...php?number=274

dealwithit

The most interesting question is-what generates the natural world/universe/existence?

Or

From what law/force/cause does the universe emerge?

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Treghc

This should be interesting... An atheistic stance is by lack of evidence to convince, therefore not knowing, but simply not believing. What's your stance? And what's your evidence?

Since he can't prove a negative I'm assuming he would have to prove the existence of something else that would make the existence of any God, by any definition, impossible- through the nature of this thing.

Originally Posted by Treghc

You do have to value logic, which is pretty darn close to faith. You can't tell somebody that doesn't value science that water is made of two Hydrogen atoms and one Oxygen atom.

Bingo. It is possible to value Reality over logic. Reality is Objective. I don't always trust my mind. I do trust the Universe.

Originally Posted by Treghc

You likely value science because you've experienced it's output in your life (you've experienced anges scientific understanding provides). There are plenty of people out there who have experienced the changes religious understanding has provided them.

That's the thing I try to get across. You know, you can go out and validate any science text by performing the same experiments under the same conditions and so forth. The idea with religions are the same. Go out and try these things and validate it for yourself. Regardless about how we feel about the results or methods in either practice.

Its all about value isn't it? I like to take all things in jest. You don't really need a single theory whatsoever to explain the universe. Its a feedback loop. Perhaps the most biased choices one can make is to abstain from participating in this process because we reject avenues based on theories.

[LOL Renegade]

Originally Posted by Paper_Cut

How about when you provide some evidence that the Qur'an might be more than a 1400 year old poem written by an illiterate pedophile with a God complex.

Well, there goes any hope of a sensible debate. I still have a LOT to learn about this religion but it's going to be hard to have a discussion with you if you jump to exaggerated conclusions like that.

[Treghc]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

Since he can't prove a negative I'm assuming he would have to prove the existence of something else that would make the existence of any God, by any definition, impossible- through the nature of this thing.

Well, I wouldn't necessarily word it as proving a negative as much as disproving something, which can be done through contradictions and the like. There are methods to disprove, just as there are methods to prove a negative (though the latter is more functional with mathematical logic than anything else).

I think Paper Cut has yet to discern the difference between the belief in a God and the belief in a theistic God or any certain "understanding" of God and God's behavior/interactions.