Right and wrong is determined by God

[OriginalBiggles]

Stranger posted;
“ Originally Posted by OriginalBiggles
There are at least two sides to every issue

OriginalBiggles, Prime ”


Often there are not. There are solidly constructed buildings & there are flimsy facades.

You unintentionally proved my assertion through your fervour to make an irrelevant point.
The strength of the argument is not at issue. That you see one side stronger than the other is evidence only of your own bias. Your assertion is repeatable from the other side with equal validity.
Do try to think before posting in future.

OriginalBiggles, Prime

 

[S.A.M.]

good stuff

but the bottom line left open is; the knowledge itself is the giver of truth; not the religion and the beliefs.

Maybe, but knowledge doesnn't occur in a vacuum. The only reason a socially dysfunctional theist like Galileo could elucidate his theories and preserve them for the next generation is because, inspite of having alienated both his peers and the man who funded him, the Pope, he was given enough provision so as to be able to ignore his daily responsibilities toward his family and sit and write. This is also true for Mendel and Darwin and all those who were able to do what they did because they did not have to spend their time worrying about their material needs.

Without the educational institutions, the opportunity for and access to learning, there would be very few people who could devote their time to study and research. Like an artist, the process of learning is not productive in itself, its the results which may or may not even benefit the one who may have spent his life in working on it, but will enhance the society in which he will leave it behind.

To diminish the efforts of those who provided these opportunities is to diminish the results obtained from them.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

You unintentionally proved my assertion through your fervour to make an irrelevant point.
The strength of the argument is not at issue. That you see one side stronger than the other is evidence only of your own bias. Your assertion is repeatable from the other side with equal validity.

OriginalBiggles, Prime

You prove mine by missing the point.
The basis for the "argument" is at issue. If there is no foundation, the "side" falls on its facade face & crumbles to dust before the "argument" begins. Faith does not move mountains.
If there is no strength to it, it is not an argument, it is simply babbling.
I see 1 "side" stronger because it is stronger.
I have no bias.
Any fool can repeat my assertion yet not with validity.

Do try to think before posting in future.

OriginalBiggles, Prime

Childish.

 

[Bishadi]

Maybe, but knowledge doesnn't occur in a vacuum.

like 'fractal' within existence.

The only reason a socially dysfunctional theist like Galileo could elucidate his theories and preserve them for the next generation is because, inspite of having alienated both his peers and the man who funded him, the Pope, he was given enough provision so as to be able to ignore his daily responsibilities toward his family and sit and write. This is also true for Mendel and Darwin and all those who were able to do what they did because they did not have to spend their time worrying about their material needs.

sound like my life

Without the educational institutions, the opportunity for and access to learning, there would be very few people who could devote their time to study and research. Like an artist, the process of learning is not productive in itself, its the results which may or may not even benefit the one who may have spent his life in working on it, but will enhance the society in which he will leave it behind.

because if the material is written as it has progressed, then no matter what happens other can observe the lessons learned

ooooooooosually the true giver, knows the work is 'good' and is doing what he/she does, for others; not the gain (approval)

To diminish the efforts of those who provided these opportunities is to diminish the results obtained from them.

not even close

Edison tried that with tesla.

 

[Bishadi]

Mass, energy & time cannot be obeyed or disobeyed or require a duty or punish or reward.

MET has a set of rules that apply universally.

We as living things living within them rules can experience life. That life and our conscious awareness is what most all want more of; the intent of living.

just as instinct has proven; the intent to continue

MET: is the 'trinity' much of the religions have tried to describe (of course without the knowledge now available but defining the properties just the same)

No.
Do you? If so, which planet are you posting from & how are you accessing our internet???

the perfect comment coming from a person who's name is (handle) strangerinastrangela...nd (completely unaware)

 

[Bishadi]

And, what of those prophecies has ever come to light?

that one day the absolute of truth will be/can be understood

and the bad guy to remove the ignorance of mankind is associated with 666

just like you are

Delusion is a big part of it. Theist's sometimes believe they're telling the truth, but their truth is based on their scriptures.

i have observed the 'delusion' along with the majority on this earth for far too long but within EVERY religious doctrine, there is good within

the issue if the believers often do not follow their own rules

eg........... if the religious people simply followed one rule "thou shalt not fib" then there would never have been a divide between honesty and religion

there would be no problem if they just followed the rules

 

[(Q)]

that one day the absolute of truth will be/can be understood

That hasn't happened. Anyone can make a generalized prediction.

and the bad guy to remove the ignorance of mankind is associated with 666

just like you are

Actually, I'm associated with V.999.

i have observed the 'delusion' along with the majority on this earth for far too long but within EVERY religious doctrine, there is good within

the issue if the believers often do not follow their own rules

eg........... if the religious people simply followed one rule "thou shalt not fib" then there would never have been a divide between honesty and religion

there would be no problem if they just followed the rules

Lying appears to be part and parcel to religion. If one is indoctrinated into their cult and does not gain the ability to reason, perhaps they also do not gain the ability to tell truth, either.

I can't imagine a cult teaching it's followers to lie. Horrors.

 

[Bishadi]

That hasn't happened. Anyone can make a generalized prediction.

the prediction is within most every religion (but the beliefs often corrupt that foundation and styme the progression (evolution of knowledge)

any of integrity can see evolution at work just by observing knowledge itself (we teach our children over time)

as for "that hasn't happened"............... i beg to differ!

Actually, I'm associated with V.999.

if you like

but ........tell the Pope; he is alive upon the element Carbon. Ask him if he knows what Carbon 14 dating is. Tell him that C-12 is the stable isotope that is chemically defined as having

6 electrons, 6 protons, and 6 neutrons

then watch him squirm in his seat! (how did you like your branding "upon the head".......... knowledge don't wash off just as nothing will stop the evolution of knowledge; that is what i am here to share)

Lying appears to be part and parcel to religion. If one is indoctrinated into their cult and does not gain the ability to reason, perhaps they also do not gain the ability to tell truth, either.

I can't imagine a cult teaching it's followers to lie. Horrors.

Jesus charged the disciples; 16:20 (Matthew)

and said cleary to follow the rules Mark 10:17-19

as another is coming John 14:15-17

and this post is from the horny one Dan 7:8 (as the truth will destroy the three ladies (three religions bound to the mount (of abraham; christianity, judaism, islam))


p/s.. don't matter the religion, they all easy to understand; if the reading is done with enough material knowledge (as ooooooooooooosual)

meaning; they all have said just about the same thing about the 'last chapter' (the revealing)

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
Mass, energy & time cannot be obeyed or disobeyed or require a duty or punish or reward. ”

MET has a set of rules that apply universally.

We as living things living within them rules can experience life. That life and our conscious awareness is what most all want more of; the intent of living.

just as instinct has proven; the intent to continue

MET: is the 'trinity' much of the religions have tried to describe (of course without the knowledge now available but defining the properties just the same)

Useless inane babbling.

the perfect comment coming from a person who's name is (handle) strangerinastrangela...nd (completely unaware)

I am unaware of any democracy on Earth. If you know 1, name it.

 

[Bishadi]

“ Originally Posted by StrangerInAStrangeLa
Mass, energy & time cannot be obeyed or disobeyed or require a duty or punish or reward. ”






Useless inane babbling.

how about this;

if life has that instinctive INTENT to live (continue) then if you want to live longer, you need a purpose

sure you may like to have sex (procreate) but do you physically know why you should? (to live into the next generation)

there are choices in life that can be directly bound to nature mathematically

remember, unless an action is imposed to exist, there is no need of the math to describe it.

so when you choose; be sure you follow the rules

Good (actions imposed to existence): support life to continue (you give your energy to contribute to life)

Bad: loss to the common (you do an action that will do more damage to others (existence) than good and becomes a loss to all) (eventually, that chain will 'equilibriate'............ go extinct)

good lives longer

bad don't

I am unaware of any democracy on Earth. If you know 1, name it.

because you follow the lead sheep rather than perform the 'doing' like a man (capable and knowing it)

 

[Bishadi]

notice 'right and wrong' are determined by god

all you have to do is know god as 'the garden' (mother nature, existence itself; all mass, all energy and all time; the trinity)

then them rules above are from nature, are true, can be defined by math and equal to all mankind (whether they like it or not)


If existence only operates ONE way: then the math is the 'name' to know.

the mathematical frame is the name fo god (the math defining the processes of mother nature)


it should be all basic, folks!

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

because you follow the lead sheep rather than perform the 'doing' like a man (capable and knowing it)

You are so full of bullshit. You are not answering the question. You make stupid foolish false assumptions about spomeone you do not know yet have seen indications on this forum contradictory to those assumptions.
What the frigging hell is the matter with you?

 

[(Q)]

the prediction is within most every religion (but the beliefs often corrupt that foundation and styme the progression (evolution of knowledge)

Nope. Predictions require some sort of observation.

as for "that hasn't happened"............... i beg to differ!

if you like

but ........tell the Pope; he is alive upon the element Carbon. Ask him if he knows what Carbon 14 dating is. Tell him that C-12 is the stable isotope that is chemically defined as having

6 electrons, 6 protons, and 6 neutrons

then watch him squirm in his seat!

The Pope? Who cares what that asshole thinks? However, continue begging.

 

[Bishadi]

You are so full of bullshit. You are not answering the question. You make stupid foolish false assumptions about spomeone you do not know yet have seen indications on this forum contradictory to those assumptions.

you made a 'stupid' comment and did not like my answer

what should i have said when an idiot posts the junk like this below?

I am unaware of any democracy on Earth. If you know 1, name it

What the frigging hell is the matter with you?

dealing with morons like you is like having to deal with politicians

 

[Bishadi]

Nope. Predictions require some sort of observation.

then how did the monkeys predict dark matter, black holes, quarks, gluons?

prophecy is by observations just like deja vu is a REAL occurance

The Pope? Who cares what that asshole thinks?

the library is what is most important from that gang

the point was you and him are both made of the (per se) number, to avoid (per the holly babble)

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

you made a 'stupid' comment and did not like my answer

what should i have said when an idiot posts the junk like this below?

dealing with morons like you is like having to deal with politicians

You babble incoherently yet say I made a stupid comment.
There was no answer to like.
You should answer the frigging question.
Personal insults undermine your proposition. Or it would if you had a proposition.

Is this the stupid comment :

Mass, energy & time cannot be obeyed or disobeyed or require a duty or punish or reward.

 

[Cris]

bishadi,

Please explain the problem you have with your posts. They are largely unintelligible and with very poor English. We are left to attempt to guess what you might mean.

There are times when you almost form a meaningful sentence but never quite make it. Is this because English is not your primary language or are you writing gibberish deliberatley?

And your condescending, insulting, and impolite attitudes, do not help your case.

Please try to change.

 

[OriginalBiggles]

You prove mine by missing the point.
The basis for the "argument" is at issue. If there is no foundation, the "side" falls on its facade face & crumbles to dust before the "argument" begins.

Certainly not. That there are two sides to an argument is the issue. One cannot have an argument unless there are two. Whether one or the other side is genuine, valid, supportable with logic and reason, is irrelevant. Your dishonest contriving of my point is duly noted.

Faith does not move mountains.
I confess to a profound indebtedness for receipt of this immaculate truth


If there is no strength to it, it is not an argument, it is simply babbling.
More dishonest contriving. We're approaching theistic logic here.

I see 1 "side" stronger because it is stronger.
Indeed, I'll avow the same........but stronger than what? The other side?
That side you claim may be non-existent? And how do we discover one side's superior strength? That is revealed by contention, by argument, by the application of logic and reason. Then we discover which is the stronger.
There's something almost biblical about your claim, as if it were handed down from the mount, inviolate, implacable, immutable. That's pure theist argument.

I have no bias.
We can see that you assert that you have no bias. Unfortunately you blotted your book before this denial.

Any fool can repeat my assertion yet not with validity.
This is merely opinion. Of course only a fool would be likely to repeat your assertion. But your assertion's validity does not stand or fall on your opinion of its validity. But I'll agree that assertion is in truth pure theist codswallop.

Is this your best thinking?

OriginalBiggles, Prime

 

[James R]

SAM:

Maybe, but knowledge doesnn't occur in a vacuum. The only reason a socially dysfunctional theist like Galileo could elucidate his theories and preserve them for the next generation is because, inspite of having alienated both his peers and the man who funded him, the Pope, he was given enough provision so as to be able to ignore his daily responsibilities toward his family and sit and write.

You have your facts wrong on many points.

Galileo was not socially dysfunctional. On the contrary, he was a persuasive man who was admired by many during his lifetime. He did not alienate his peers; he had many lifelong supporters. Nor did he alienate the Pope, whose hands were tied by a combination of circumstances. The Pope actually took pity on Galileo. Galileo did not ignore his responsibilities to his family, either. He was in constant contact with his two daughters, and loved by both of them. He also supported them financially throughout his life.

One wonders where you got your information about Galileo from. It sounds like you've just invented stuff about him to suit your preconceptions.

This is also true for Mendel and Darwin and all those who were able to do what they did because they did not have to spend their time worrying about their material needs.

I don't know much about Mendel's life, but I know that if you're trying to smear Darwin in the same way you tried to smear Galileo, you're just as wrong about him.

 

[S.A.M.]

Sounds like we both read entirely different biographies of Galileo. The one I read was critical of his leaving science and presuming to speak for religion and philosophy. The fact that he never married the mother of his children [she was of a lower class] meant that his daughters were illegitimate. He could not provide for large dowries to eclipse their illegitimcy . I think they all entered the convent finally [Virginia surely did, the others I am not sure of the sequence of events].

The reason why he was put on trial was because he abandoned reason for childish name calling:

“If he would have realized that the object of science is restricted to mathematics and the laws of nature, he would have had no difficulty in following the counsels of Bellarmine and the Academy of Lincei, as well as the injunctions proposed by Urban VIII in his writing of Dialogo. With this, he would have avoided so many troubles” - Fr Mario Vigano in M. Vigano, “Galileo ieri e oggi,” , p. 388.

He did alienate his peers since they got so fed up of him they involved the theologians and clerics maintaining that Galileo was rewriting theoology and philosophy

"Galileo was not condemned for the things he said, but for the way he said them. He made statements with a sectarian intolerance, like a ‘missionary’ of a new gospel …. Since he did not have objective evidence for what he said, the things he said in his private letters to those men [of the Roman College] made him suspect of dogmatism supporting the new religion of science. One who would not immediately accept the entire Copernican system was ‘an imbecile with his head in the clouds,’ ‘a stain upon mankind,’ ‘a child who never grew up,’ and so on. At depth the certainty of being infallible seemed to belong more to him than to the religious authority" - Vittorio Messori
-

He was lucky he had a personal relation with Pope Urban who commuted his sentence to something resemblance house arrest especially after the parody he did of him. Those were not benevolent times anywhere.

IIRC, his daughter frequently wrote him from the convent asking for food and cloth when he became successful, but he ignored her pleas because he was fed up of his family responsibilities:

From her letter to him:

But maybe you have a better source?

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=...qnHNA6m&sig=6MmwbkdxyL37gnMN01jGQufHt-o&hl=en

Some other interesting notes about him:

1 Galileo was sent to a Jesuit monastery to study medicine. But after four years he announced he’d found his calling: to be a monk. His father withdrew him—but not before Galileo joined the order, making him a defrocked priest for life.

7 In 1617, Galileo bought a villa west of Florence to be close to his daughters’ convent. Because his daughters’ illegitimacy would warrant a large dowry that he was unwilling to pay, the girls had no choice but to stay at the convent for the rest of their lives

12 The University of Pisa hired Galileo as a professor of mathematics, but because he was difficult to work with and inappropriate with his students, the university chose not to renew his contract.

19 After his father died, and in fear of debtor’s prison, Galileo made a living designing a military compass to aim cannon*balls. His earlier invention—the first thermometer to measure temperature variations—was a failure financially.

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jul/20-things-you-didn2019t-know-about-galileo


Mendel lived entirely as a monk, under the Augustinian Abbey, which funded his studies at the University of Vienna and kept him as a teacher of physics
Darwins story is a little different. He did not apply himself to his studies well, probably as a result of a wealthy upbringing and if not for his encounter with the biological theologians he met while studying to be a parson, the Origin of Species might never have happened. The man who most influenced him, Henslow, was a vicar.