dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, Luc Turpin said: Maybe something, maybe nothing! Let's assume nothing, before we assume that god wrote the bible...
Luc Turpin Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, dimreepr said: Let's assume nothing, before we assume that god wrote the bible... God did not write the bible, humans did! Spirituality "light" avoids all of these religious pitfalls. Its a mannequin without a dress up!
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 2 minutes ago, Moontanman said: I must have missed the question, feel free to ask again. OK, what aphorism is your philosophy? But we both know that you're being deliberately obtuse, FFS. -1
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, Luc Turpin said: God did not write the bible, humans did! Spirituality "light" avoids all of these religious pitfalls. Its a mannequin without a dress up! In all seriousness I see no empirical evidence of anything supernatural, until such evidence is given the concept of a god is a non starter for me as is everything that flows from that concept.
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 3 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said: God did not write the bible, humans did! That's my point, jeez...
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 2 minutes ago, dimreepr said: OK, what aphorism is your philosophy? But we both know that you're being deliberately obtuse, FFS. Hello pot, have you met kettle? I find your assertions that my philosophy is an aphorism insulting.
Luc Turpin Posted May 28 Posted May 28 10 minutes ago, Moontanman said: That would be a true statement but I am not impressed by people who ignore the tenets of their religion so they can tolerate the people who do follow the intolerance their religion demands but they ignore. The intolerant who are actually following their religions tenets are easy to see but the ones who try and pretend their religion doesn't demand those things when it clearly does are not a good thing, they simply insulate the fundies from criticism while they continue to undermine society. I am tolerant of religions who do not think they have the right the tell everyone else what to do, I am mostly familiar with the Abrahamic religions to be honest. I must have missed the question, feel free to ask again. Thank you for the precision! 1
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, dimreepr said: That's my point, jeez... I would suggest you state your points a bit less obtusely.
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 Just now, Moontanman said: Hello pot, have you met kettle? I find your assertions that my philosophy is an aphorism insulting. Exactly, Jesus Christ do I actually have to spell it out for you... 🙄
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 Just now, dimreepr said: Exactly, Jesus Christ do I actually have to spell it out for you... 🙄 yes
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 Just now, Moontanman said: yes There's none so blind as those who don't want to see.
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, dimreepr said: There's none so blind as those who don't want to see. I would suggest you stop trying to be cute and state your question clearly... I know that is a problem for you and your agenda of obfuscation but I suggest you try.
Luc Turpin Posted May 28 Posted May 28 2 minutes ago, Moontanman said: In all seriousness I see no empirical evidence of anything supernatural, until such evidence is given the concept of a god is a non starter for me as is everything that flows from that concept. Spirituality as in a need to be good-moral, not necessarily religious with God. My spirituality light, as stated earlier, "simply implies sacredly offering back our atoms and molecules to the universe upon passing away". Its to resist our evil nature as best as possible. Also, I find it personally supernatural that all of this (our universe) has been made possible through a single random quantum fluctuation. Maybe there is a force out there that puts it all together. I contend that it may be consciousness, but there is only circumstantial evidence at this time pointing in that direction.
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, Luc Turpin said: Spirituality as in a need to be good-moral, not necessarily religious with God. My spirituality light, as stated earlier, "simply implies sacredly offering back our atoms and molecules to the universe upon passing away". Its to resist our evil nature as best as possible. Also, I find it personally supernatural that all of this (our universe) has been made possible through a single random quantum fluctuation. You have a right to those personal beliefs, we all have some interesting thoughts rolling around in our heads (I know I do) but unless you are a solipsist you have to admit that your belief does not equal knowledge of the world outside your mind. BTW your definition of spirituality makes no sense to me but then again why should it?
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 3 minutes ago, Moontanman said: I would suggest you stop trying to be cute and state your question clearly... I know that is a problem for you and your agenda of obfuscation but I suggest you try. There's some lovely filth down here...
Luc Turpin Posted May 28 Posted May 28 2 minutes ago, Moontanman said: You have a right to those personal beliefs, we all have some interesting thoughts rolling around in our heads (I know I do) but unless you are a solipsist you have to admit that your belief does not equal knowledge of the world outside your mind. BTW your definition of spirituality makes no sense to me but then again why should it? Agree to the first part and will work on my definition of spirituality.
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 minute ago, Luc Turpin said: Agree to the first part and will work on my definition of spirituality. No need for that, it is your definition!
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 12 minutes ago, Moontanman said: I would suggest you stop trying to be cute and state your question clearly... I know that is a problem for you and your agenda of obfuscation but I suggest you try. OK, I'll try again; oh what's the point... I won't get any farther than @Mordred did in the nuke discussion, your right because you say so. He didn't assert "that nukes are bad, mkay" and I didn't ask a question "mkay"... Your only making yourself look stupid... -1
Luc Turpin Posted May 28 Posted May 28 21 minutes ago, Moontanman said: No need for that, it is your definition! Still vague, even for me!
Moontanman Posted May 28 Posted May 28 3 minutes ago, dimreepr said: OK, I'll try again; oh what's the point... I won't get any farther than @Mordred did in the nuke discussion, your right because you say so. Not what happened, please don't critique something from another thread here. 3 minutes ago, dimreepr said: He didn't assert "that nukes are bad, mkay" and I didn't ask a question "mkay"... Again, not the place for this. 3 minutes ago, dimreepr said: Your only making yourself look stupid... Back at you dude.
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 6 minutes ago, Moontanman said: Not what happened, please don't critique something from another thread here. Again, not the place for this. Back at you dude. I'm happy to defend my supposed stupid, you just want to revel in it; but I can tolerate your version... I could be argueing in my spare time...😉
dimreepr Posted May 28 Posted May 28 1 hour ago, dimreepr said: I'm happy to defend my supposed stupid, you just want to revel in it; but I can tolerate your version... I could be argueing in my spare time...😉 But that's not the nine o'clock news
MigL Posted May 28 Posted May 28 (edited) I did not know 'world views' could be so contentious and confrontational ... 4 hours ago, Phi for All said: Citation? All my studies blame the belief and not the believer. 4 hours ago, iNow said: Yes, sometimes even all at once. It's humor; chuckle and carry on. ( that was the best line in this whole thread ) Edited May 28 by MigL 1
StringJunky Posted May 29 Posted May 29 9 hours ago, dimreepr said: That's my point, jeez... Maybe, if you learn to speak in the language of the listener, threads wouldn't get derailed so often. Trying to throw conversational curve balls all the time gets very tiresome.... use very sparingly. Keep on the track, mate. 1
Mordred Posted May 29 Posted May 29 (edited) 8 hours ago, dimreepr said: OK, I'll try again; oh what's the point... I won't get any farther than @Mordred did in the nuke discussion, your right because you say so. He didn't assert "that nukes are bad, mkay" and I didn't ask a question "mkay"... Your only making yourself look stupid... Please don't bring me into this discussion. The other discussion has nothing to do with this thread. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and personal opinions. One shouldn't judge others when their opinions or beliefs run into conflict with others. For the record I'm not precisely blameless in that discussion either and fully admit I could have handled it better. Anyways AFIAK it's resolved and we both moved on. Edited May 29 by Mordred
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now