Is that a bad thing?
I mean: Threats? Force? Theft? Rape? Murder? Genocide?
If there’s no such thing as God, then there’s no such thing as morality. Anyone can do whatever suits them. Because, heck, who should tell you what, or what not, to do?
1 Like
Since you’re naturally given to rationality, please give me a rational origin of space, time and matter.
How did space come to be?
How did time come to be?
Where did matter come from?
2 Likes
Whatcha mean is it a bad thing? You trolling or got a bigger a point?
It certainly is a bad thing. It’s tantamount to indoctrination. It’s subjecting the most vulnerable demographic to hogwash. It’s akin to the tranny indoctrination Kosmic Karai is busy protecting here: Transgender identify is valid and deserves equal treatment and respect - #59 by Class8_Dropout
Humans need God for morality? My GOD.
I’ll refer you to this series of debates between Sam Harris and JP. Can’t present it to you any better. But the gist of it all is that different systems give to the emergence of a system of morality and ethics, even within the animal kingdom.
Chimps show empathy, fairness and reciprocity without ever reading Leviticus. If monkeys can behave, humans can too.
This summarizes the premise.
The origin of time and space?
You must be new to the scientific method and empiricism bro.
You invent an uncaused cause that gets a free pass from the question you just asked.
Put simply, science says ‘we’re working on it and this is what we’ve figured so far’ while lazy religion attributes everything to magic sky-daddy and tells you to shut up and never think about it otherwise you’ll break your feeble human brain or get banished to the bowels of earth where made-up bad guy will torture you with fire for laughs. There, rationality and honesty vs a system that’s terrified of the words ‘I don’t know.’
1 Like
Silly questions! How did space come to be? Space is nothingness. Consider your question again. You’re asking :who made nothing?" If there is nothing, then it requires no designer and no maker! You ask how time came to be. Ask any physicist. There is no such thing as time. Time is a human construct. Time is something created by man that is based on any one of repeating occurrences. A day is a concept that man assigned to one rotation of the Earth. It’s man made, not based in science. A year is one trip around the sun. Again, man made. An hour is a 24th of a day. Point is, take away the Earth and none of these man made things exist. Lastly you ask, where did matter come from. Science has not yet answered that question, but maybe matter has always existed, much like the god that believers claim who has always existed. If god required no designer or maker, why can’t matter exist under those same terms?
If there was a shred of truth in what you just said, then all the atheists on Earth would be running amok in the streets slashing throats, raping babies, making human sacrifices, blowing up buildings, torturing and maiming. But we both know that if you pick up a history book, most of these things were routinely done by the religious. Study the Inquisition, the holocaust, the African slave trade, 9/11, countless genocides in the ameriKKKas, Africa, Australia, Hiroshima and the Crusades. All acts of RELIGIOUS people! Any questions?
Very well put!
You’ve just admitted to 2 things:
- That there’s no “scientific” basis to rule out God’s existence.
- That “science” is a religion, just like any other out there. Why? It believes in things not proven (or, at least, not yet proven).
1 Like
You’re doing a very bad job trying to sell yourself as a smart person.
Who talked about units of time? Ati a day, a year. 
Of course those are human constructs!
I’m talking about time itself, not units of time.
Let me dumb it down to your IQ level:
My question was: why can’t we go back to yesterday? Time moves forward. So when and where did it start?
1 Like
Why do you expect him to carry himself like Jesus when you do not believe in Jesus? Thats peak irony and hypocrisy. Quoting Jesus when its convenient for you then going on to deny Him. By the way, the sole purpose of Jesus’ existence is to show humans that no one can be perfect like Him but we should all emulate to be like Him. Which means every single replies of yours just contradictions and ironies
2 Likes
There used to be tv shows in the 80s and 90s where kids would be scared straight by being locked up in maximum security prisons for a day to teach them a lesson. Surprise surprise those programs ended in disaster as most kids traumatived at an early age became hardened criminals. in kenya, the worst offenders, who regulary commit murder are police. Exposing your kids to one of the most brutal groups of people is a bad decision
Spot on. It makes no sense to aggressively debate about the existence of a being you believe doesnt exist. But Plus I have also never heard of demons being cast out in the name of allah or such
Now you’re getting it!
- There’s no scientific basis to rule out God. Science doesn’t set out to rule out God. Science isn’t a replacement for God. Science is a tool to explain why things work the way they do. It’s that simple. Science doesn’t purport to explain everything with 100% accuracy and decree no further inquiry is needed. No, it’s a self-correcting system that allows the updating of the human body of knowledge whenever better, plausible explanations for phenomena come along. It’s prudent and honest and based upon reproducibility and empricism. Unlike religion religion which preposterously says things are the way they are ‘because’. If you want a cogent explanation of why things work the way they do, would you go for a system that lays down a transparent, unassuming way of interrogating things or one that, in principle and from historical context, forbids all manner of inquiry?
- False equivalence fallacy. Religions demand faith in unfalsifiable dogmas like virgin births or reincarnations without evidence. Science is a method: hypothesize, test, revise based on data. The self-correcting, reproducibility-based, empirical system otherwise called the scientific method.
And if you think about it, it’s kind of like how modern justice systems work. Evidence, testimony and repeatable standards of proof. Not blind faith or unfalsifiable claims, presuming innocence until proven guilty. Religion says guilty ‘because’ (divine authority). Preposterous.
I will never understand this talk about Christianity being an indoctrination/cult. How is it indoctrination to love your neighbor as you love yourself? How is it an indoctrination to stop sinning? Fellas will go ahead and nitpick mundane parts of the bible then dismiss the entire religion based on trivial details. Lets be honest, you lot hate what the bible stands for, you hate the fact that the bible is against drunkardness, sexual immorality, gossiping and stuff that youre deeply into you cant imagine your life without the same. Its either that or you have simply not taken your time to read the bible, simply going by what is cool and masses are advocating for.
1 Like
How exactly is Christianity an indoctrination?
1 Like
Atheists arent running amock in streets causing because they definitely follow the rules of the land aka constitution, which you can take a guess was influenced by which philosophical roots.
Says the very same guy who called the most fundamental questions that science CANNOT answer “silly”
1 Like
Amazing you took this posititon. I could have sworn you were the first to rope in some ad hominems. Not very self aware now, are ya? All you people seem to follow a specific formular in your arguments, almost like youre engaging in this debate not because you actually believe its the truth but because its the trend.
1 Like
Why do you purport to know anything about me? You lot? You’re assuming I’m for all things the Bible is opposed to? Guilty before I’m even charged, right? Also because morality is impossible to achieve without divine guidance, right? I’ve already made my case in the post you quoted but didn’t quite grasp.
Anyway, it’s indoctrination in the sense it’s
instilled from the earliest age through repetition, authority figures and emotional conditioning in kids. Happens before critical thinking develops and frames dissent as moral rebellion and threatens eternal damnation, much like you’re presuming guilt without evidence in your own retort here. I can already see you start to type furiously claiming science is taught from a young age too. But if try and understand my previous comments on the scientific method, then you’d know it’s the opposite in that it builds in curiosity and skepticism and treats every claim as provisional.
I totally agree with 95% of what you’ve said.
If you noticed, in my response, I put the word science in quotes, i.e. “science”.
There’s this misconception that you can’t believe in both science and Christianity. I do believe in both. For me personally, science validates my Christian beliefs. But I know one thing: science has its limits. It is at the end of those limits that I turn to Christianity. Anyway, I am digressing.
You said:
"Religions demand faith in unverifiable dogmas like virgin births or reincarnations without evidence. "
But so does “science”.
“Science” demands faith in unverifiable dogmas like the Big Bang Theory or evolution without evidence. "
1 Like
If straddling both sides of the philosophical schism works for you, good for you. Sincerely. I’d find it hypocritical in that I’m trying to eat my cake and keep it.
Now, TBBT is an ‘off-shoot’ of the standard model. It’s even in the name — theory. The standard theory is getting bombarded left right and center as more evidence is obtained from places like CERN. In fact, more theories abound from TBBT skeptics like Eric Weinstein who put forth an interesting but remarkably inconsistent theory, to skepticism from loony bin material like Sabine Hossenfelder.
The only reason it (standard model) stands is because it’s the most plausible explanation we have so far. I cut my teeth on these and had fun while at it:
It’s such an interesting space.
1 Like