Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2021 21:54:24 GMT
Even if you prove that god exist, it's a far cry from proving that there is any kind of afterlife, let alone any kind of worshiping or song and dance expected of humankind.
People posit that god is perfect but at the same time that he's a narcissistic psychopath who expect people to spend their all life worshiping it a certain way or else to undergo perpetual torture.
Just imagine the kind of psychopath who would torture people because they didn't spend their all life repeating inane mantras and do idiotic gestures.
Yeah, but he's perfect, right?
You have to wonder what kind of mentally deranged people would make up something like that and then force it on entire generations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Apr 26, 2021 15:23:37 GMT
So...you don't really want to argue about whether God exists or not? You really want to argue about the nature of a particular god? The claims of a particular belief system?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2021 15:47:47 GMT
So...you don't really want to argue about whether God exists or not? You really want to argue about the nature of a particular god? The claims of a particular belief system? The existence of god is not a real issue because it all depends on what you call god, if like Einstein you see it as just another word for the laws of nature then everyone believes in god even the atheists. So the question of whether god exists or not is pointless. It's all about what you think god is. Note that once again you've managed not to say anything about the topic at except one more of your pointless adhominem remarks. Stop that!! I mean it !!! I would have put a smiley at the end of that except that these are so ambiguous that I don't know which one stands for what!!! And let me return the compliment: So you don't really want to argue at all!!! What you really want to do is find a way to insult the poster (IE me) by pretending not to understand the issue or presenting a straw man version of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Apr 26, 2021 17:46:50 GMT
So...you don't really want to argue about whether God exists or not? You really want to argue about the nature of a particular god? The claims of a particular belief system? The existence of god is not a real issue because it all depends on what you call god, if like Einstein you see it as just another word for the laws of nature then everyone believes in god even the atheists. So the question of whether god exists or not is pointless. It's all about what you think god is. Note that once again you've managed not to say anything about the topic at except one more of your pointless adhominem remarks. Stop that!! I mean it !!! I would have put a smiley at the end of that except that these are so ambiguous that I don't know which one stands for what!!! And let me return the compliment: So you don't really want to argue at all!!! What you really want to do is find a way to insult the poster (IE me) by pretending not to understand the issue or presenting a straw man version of it. Not at all. I deal with information and strive to understand. Where we disagree, we disagree, but I won't misrepresent you nor insult you. You have demonstrated repeatedly (and even explicitly admitted) that you misrepresent. If you want to honestly deal with ideas and concepts, then don't choose to be insulted when an idea is challenged. If an idea is challenged, that is not an insult to you as a person, that is, to your identity. It is a challenge to an idea. On the other hand, if someone disagrees with you, you can choose not to respond with insults. You can choose not to explicitly insult their identity. So, I'd be happy to discuss the existence of God, but I would guess (having done this for years), that we would merely end up coming to differing foundational presuppositions, at which point the best we can probably do is acknowledge those and move on. "Agree to disagree," but not at some shallow level. Next, we could discuss the implications of the existence of a deity. Or even the implications of the existence of "my deity"—like, "the existence of the afterlife." There is certainly a profitable discussion in there somewhere. I'd be happy to do that. Finally, we could also discuss the merits of "worship of a deity." There is also some serious profitable discussion in there (given that the conversation is had without misrepresentation). I'd be happy to do that as well. But it's not helpful to mix all of these things together as if it's one topic and go at it. |
|
