I find it interesting that after the cult people still hold on to religion.... (page 3)

Sea Breeze

Jeffro,

The reason that you and I both subsribe to, use & have total faith in the laws of logic is because we both know the God of the bible. (Romans 1: 18) We are all "without excuse". You were made in his image same as I and use his inventions same as I do. You know those laws don't change because God "changes not." He is the source of your confidence in reason - truths we agree upon.

What other conclusion could a thinking person come to?

You claim that an assumption of chaos, chance, and physicality can create non-physical, stable and complex conceptual truths from such a source. It makes no sense.

Your worldview is inconsistent and that should be a big red flag to correct course. And, that should matter to you.... logically speaking.

Jeffro

See Breeze:

The reason that you and I both subsribe to, use & have total faith in the laws of logic is because we both know the God of the bible. (Romans 1: 18) We are all "without excuse". You were made in his image same as I and use his inventions same as I do. You know those laws don't change because God "changes not." He is the source of your confidence in the truths we agree upon.

Sigh. No, irrelevant sophistry in a religious text does not trump what I know to be true about my own thoughts. 🙄

What other conclusion could a thinking person come to?

A nonsensical question. Obviously, different individuals could hold any number of alternative real or imagined beliefs.

You claim that an assumption of chaos, chance, and physicality can support nonphysical, stable and complex conceptual truths from such a source. It makes no sense.
Your worldview is inconsistent. And, that should matter to you.... logically speaking.

Straw man. I made no such claim that "an assumption of chaos, chance, and physicality can support nonphysical, stable and complex conceptual truths from such a source" (though you also haven't demonstrated that such couldn't be the case, hence an argument from incredulity). The expectation that I should have some alternative explanation at all to 'compete' with your imaginary explanation is a false dichotomy, and at its core, also a fallacious appeal to pride.

Sea Breeze

The expectation that I should have some alternative explanation at all to compete with your imaginary explanation is a false dichotomy

So, you admit that you have "no explanation at all"?

Jeffro

Sea Breeze:

So, you admit that you have "no explanation at all"?

Not what I said. Your expectation that I should have an alternative explanation to compete with your imaginary one is fallacious.

Whether or not I have a real or imagined alternative explanation to your religious superstitions has no bearing on whether your religious superstitions are true. Hence, you are attempting to shift the burden of proof.

Sea Breeze

That's why I'm asking for clarification. So, you have an explanation, but you just don't want to share it?

Jeffro

I'm not interested in this tedious game. You assert a religious superstition without evidence. I do not.

Sea Breeze

And you assert a confidence in logic without the slightest clue (at least any that you are willing to share) of why it is reliable. It makes no sense. That is an inconsistent worldview and you deserve better than that.

Jeffro

🤦‍♂️Thanks for the further appeal to pride, but I'm bored now.

You're yet to offer any evidence to support any of your religious superstitions.

Sea Breeze

Jeffro, have a good evening. You know that my evidence comes from the Holy Bible. I have no problem quoting scripture in a discussion so that my worldview is at least consistent.

If you ever want to disclose how or why you have such great faith in the laws of logic, without acknowledgement of a lawgiver, I'm always up for the discussion.

Phizzy

Back to beaver eaters O.P, he said " but in reality I just don't care. " I think that most of us who are non-theists of some stripe now feel the same way.

A god who cannot be detected doesn't matter.

I don't know gods do not exist,"know" in the scientific sense of having evidence they don't, but I don't care either.

We could call ourselves " Apatheists" by combining Apathy with Theist, although someone may look at the word and think we worship Bees.

Eager beaver also said " maybe for some, they need a crutch..." that can be the only reason people hang on to belief in things that cannot be proven to be true, i.e Religions and gods. (Truth is only established with irrefutable evidence, religions and their gods do not have that).

And I still don't care !

I find it interesting that after the cult people still hold on to religion....

Share this