Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll guess that you'll rather find it hi -jacked for Pan -En-theism and mystic will turn it into his own personal thread, like the one that was closed because it just became too tiresome.
What became tiresome was your inability to refute the existence of God using your default of "No God until proven to exist with evidence OTHER THAN what we already know about our Reality." That cuts your atheism off at the knees.
What became tiresome was your inability to refute the existence of God using your default of "No God until proven to exist with evidence OTHER THAN what we already know about our Reality." That cuts your atheism off at the knees.
Only if your opinion was rational instead of the usual question begging.
I'll guess that you'll rather find it hi -jacked for Pan -En-theism and mystic will turn it into his own personal thread, like the one that was closed because it just became too tiresome.
lets see ... we talk about proof. its your bullhorn slogan "we use science and evidence"
well now trans me boy, when we use science data to form a belief that belief and the science data become the same thing. so what is science data describing? it aint rocket science trans and why you run away.
Of course, me pressing you as hard as you do theist is see as rude and "derailing the tread". yeah, thats sure is; how it is.
but the realty of the situation is you are at war and could care less what science says or not. The parts that you need, you use. The parts you don't need, you ignore.
stay hidden trans. "something more" is by ffar the most scientifically valid stance. When only science data is use the god claim becomes the universe. rational people see that as "yes, how can it not be that way?"
You see it as "OMAG, (Oh my anti-god) theist will use and make my sect of atheism crusade harder."
when we have to "advocate for atheism", meaning we are "advocating for a statement of belief about god" we can't use the whole truth. and thats why you run away and avoid any science showing that "something more" is so far in a way more reliable than "anti-god" that you have to attack. calling people like me "bad atheist".
Only if your opinion was rational instead of the usual question begging.
And only if he wasn't repeatedly strawmanning the rationalist position by pretending the burden of proof falls on to the skeptical side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
post above uses the phrase "prove God exists nonsense."
but you yourself insist that the only way to discern truth is through using the scientific method.
it appears to me that is an example of "prove God exists nonsense"
From what i've seen of the derails it is because of the preponderance of, the insistence of, the worshipping at the altar of, and the proselytizing of science and the scientific method. which is not what paths of religion and spirituality are about, and it is not what this forum to discuss paths of religion and spirituality is about. There is nothing sacred about the scientific method. there is nothing holy about science.
Now I'm with Mystic on this one. His Faith at least tries to use the validated findings of science to make a case for 'God' (and he is about the only one that does so), whereas you simply rely on faith -claims with appeals to the Unknown as all that you have as an argument.
So is there a new thread for Hindu which is known for many gods like Pantheism
Hindu or rather Hinduism is not pantheism. It believes in one Brhmam or Oneness that manifests as the universe and the world we know. the energy that exists in the 5 elements
are personified as gods and revered.
From what i've seen of the derails it is because of the preponderance of, the insistence of, the worshipping at the altar of, and the proselytizing of science and the scientific method. which is not what paths of religion and spirituality are about, and it is not what this forum to discuss paths of religion and spirituality is about. There is nothing sacred about the scientific method. there is nothing holy about science.
On that we certainly agree. I have never seen anyone, anywhere, claim there is anything "sacred or holy" about science or the scientific method. I'm not even sure what that would mean.
What can be said is that science (via the scientific method) provides the best means we have identified for advancing knowledge, testing and validating new ideas, separating conjecture from fact, understanding the world around us and how it works... in short, describing reality. Now, if the argument is that religion and spirituality do not aspire to those same goals, then by all means... put a wall around these sacred paths and discuss science elsewhere. By extension, this would mean that, when people discuss concepts like Divine Creators, or reincarnation, or resurrections, or the Exodus, or global floods, or past lives, or after lives, or Satan, or Adam & Eve, or purgatory, or angels, or crystals, or energy fields, or miracles, etc, etc, etc... there would be no expectation that any of these things really existed or happened or worked that way. Deal?
If not, then we're back to having a role for science, in helping us understand "how things work." Because that's all science does, when it's not being worshipped.
Last edited by HeelaMonster; 09-10-2020 at 10:22 AM..
Hindu or rather Hinduism is not pantheism. It believes in one Brhmam or Oneness that manifests as the universe and the world we know. the energy that exists in the 5 elements
are personified as gods and revered.
Arguable. Whether one regards a tribe of gods existing in a Cosmic mind' of some sort (name you own), the fact is that there is a race or family of distinct gods, created in our image, give or take some tweaks, and that is a pantheon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeelaMonster
On that we certainly agree. I have never seen anyone, anywhere, claim there is anything "sacred or holy" about science or the scientific method. I'm not even sure what that would mean.
What can be said is that science (via the scientific method) provides the best means we have identified for advancing knowledge, testing and validating new ideas, separating conjecture from fact, understanding the world around us and how it works... in short, describing reality. Now, if the argument is that religion and spirituality do not aspire to those same goals, then by all means... put a wall around these sacred paths and discuss science elsewhere. By extension, this would mean that, when people discuss concepts like Divine Creators, or reincarnation, or resurrections, or the Exodus, or global floods, or past lives, or after lives, or Satan, or Adam & Eve, or purgatory, or angels, or crystals, or energy fields, or miracles, etc, etc, etc... there would be no expectation that any of these things really existed or happened or worked that way. Deal?
If not, then we're back to having a role for science, in helping us understand "how things work." Because that's all science does, when it's not being worshipped.
Thank you. That is not a proper argument but a classic Strawman, done by a sarcastic caricature of what science is and does in hopes to discredit it. It only discredits the persons doing it.
I might observe that trying to misrepresent atheism as a religion (tried on here, not long since) extends also to 'Sciencism' which I gather is acusing science of being a dogma that most be accepted without question.
Science of course does not work like that, as they know with the 'science is always changing its' mind'. This is seen as debunking science and only if it is and Unquestionable Dogma that cannot be wrong.
It rather gives the game away that this is all projection. They cannot see how it works other than in the way they theist -think. It is ironic that it is actually religion that is always getting things wrong and we have the adherents either denying it or accepting it and pretending that the Bible never said that at all - Slavery being the Biggie there.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-10-2020 at 11:00 AM..
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
From what i've seen of the derails it is because of the preponderance of, the insistence of, the worshipping at the altar of, and the proselytizing of science and the scientific method. which is not what paths of religion and spirituality are about, and it is not what this forum to discuss paths of religion and spirituality is about. There is nothing sacred about the scientific method. there is nothing holy about science.
Arguable. Whether one regards a tribe of gods existing in a Cosmic mind' of some sort (name you own), the fact is that there is a race or family of distinct gods, created in our image, give or take some tweaks, and that is a pantheon.
I thought Pantheism was when you pray to a tree and think the tree is god. Hindus pray to a tree, thinking of an aspect of God that exists in trees, the same aspect which is in me
I believe there is a distinction, and it is called monism. If you don't see it, that's fine. Pantheism sits fine with me.
I thought Pantheism was when you pray to a tree and think the tree is god. Hindus pray to a tree, thinking of an aspect of God that exists in trees, the same aspect which is in me
I believe there is a distinction, and it is called monism. If you don't see it, that's fine. Pantheism sits fine with me.
I thought of it like you do too. Its about the system, taken as a whole, is their god.
the tree, the dirt, the sky ... the Forrest .... the oneness.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll guess that you'll rather find it hi -jacked for Pan -En-theism and mystic will turn it into his own personal thread, like the one that was closed because it just became too tiresome.
Now I'm with Mystic on this one. His Faith at least tries to use the validated findings of science to make a case for 'God' (and he is about the only one that does so), whereas you simply rely on faith -claims with appeals to the Unknown as all that you have as an argument.
I have never seen anyone, anywhere, claim there is anything "sacred or holy" about science or the scientific method. I'm not even sure what that would mean.
