21 May 22
@fmf saidIt isn't a matter of fabricating an explanation; even what I have said concerning
Neither of us knows what the origin of the universe is. I admit it and you don't.
I don't need to fabricate an explanation to compete with the speculative theological one you have settled for.
I see your aspiration to immortality as wishful thinking that "you would like to be true". You offer not a scrap of credible evidence that you are immortal; the mysteries of the uni ...[text shortened]... s grow old and die isn't "blind faith".
Your religious beliefs do not create any jeopardy for me.
a reason for everything isn't anything other than logic. You cannot say chance with
nothing as the cause due to the fact there are no odds in nothing acting on nothing;
as soon as you say something other than nothing was involved, it becomes
dangerously close to the one thing you don't want to be true because admitting
evidence for a transcendent cause cuts the rug right out from under you. You know
this is true, you cannot even come up with a natural explanation, and you use the
term theology because it fits.
It isn't too difficult to see your mind going towards God as an explanation when you
invoke the term speculative theology because that could grant a possibility of
a divine source. I'm sure if you could come up with any other possibility could do all
that is required for the what we experience in this life where you could leave aside
the theology, I'm sure you would use it, and if you have something other than blind
faith and wishful thinking to justify one, I would like to see it.
21 May 22
@kellyjay saidI know what your religious faith is, KellyJay. And I know that you are very, very, very certain that your religious explanation is "the truth". But both of us can only speculate about this issue of supernatural causality, and so neither of us knows how the universe originated, assuming it did.
It isn't a matter of fabricating an explanation; even what I have said concerning
a reason for everything isn't anything other than logic. You cannot say chance with
nothing as the cause due to the fact there are no odds in nothing acting on nothing;
as soon as you say something other than nothing was involved, it becomes
dangerously close to the one thing you don't wan ...[text shortened]... have something other than blind
faith and wishful thinking to justify one, I would like to see it.
21 May 22
@kellyjay saidYou sound like either [1] you haven't read any of my posts over the last decade, or [2] you are pretending not to have read or comprehended any of my posts over the last decade.
You cannot say chance withnothing as the cause due to the fact there are no odds in nothing acting on nothing; as soon as you say something other than nothing was involved, it becomesdangerously close to the one thing you don't want to be true because admittingevidence for a transcendent cause cuts the rug right out from under you.
I have said, directly to you, dozens and dozens of times, that there could be "a transcendent cause" for the universe a.k.a. a creator entity.
Why are you pretending that I have NOT been saying this? Why are you pretending that I am reluctant to "admit" this? You are being so disingenuous.
The last time I said it explicitly was on page 7 of THIS thread [and true to form, you basically ignored it]. You are pretending I didn't or that I didn't say it umpteen times previously this year alone.
I explicitly said that I have a theory that there is a creator entity that made everything.
As for "theology", I use the term to refer to things like ancient Hebrew mythology.
@kellyjay saidblind faith and wishful thinking
I'm sure if you could come up with any other possibility could do all
that is required for the what we experience in this life where you could leave asidethe theology, I'm sure you would use it, and if you have something other than blindfaith and wishful thinking to justify one, I would like to see it.
So says the guy who believes his belief in Jesus renders himself immortal!
21 May 22
@fmf saidThat is your dogma, the one truth you trust in; it's all between our ears, so all we can
I know what your religious faith is, KellyJay. And I know that you are very, very, very certain that your religious explanation is "the truth". But both of us can only speculate about this issue of supernatural causality, and so neither of us knows how the universe originated, assuming it did.
do is speculate. A problem with your stance is that speculation is about something, if
true, is not swayed one way or another by our speculation.
21 May 22
@kellyjay saidAt least you are coming to a realization that speculating about this kind of stuff ~ your everpresent "if" ~ is all a function of cognition, i.e. it's "between our ears".
That is your dogma, the one truth you trust in; it's all between our ears, so all we can
do is speculate. A problem with your stance is that speculation is about something, if
true, is not swayed one way or another by our speculation.
21 May 22
@fmf saidPlease acknowledge that you have read and understood my post above, KellyJay.
You sound like either [1] you haven't read any of my posts over the last decade, or [2] you are pretending not to have read or comprehended any of my posts over the last decade.
I have said, directly to you, dozens and dozens of times, that there could be "a transcendent cause" for the universe a.k.a. a creator entity.
Why are you pretending that I have NOT been saying th ...[text shortened]... everything.
As for "theology", I use the term to refer to things like ancient Hebrew mythology.
My theories are [1] that there is a creator entity that made everything ["a cause"], and [2] the universe has always existed ["no cause"], but my overarching realization [as I would put it, because it seems patently obvious to me] is that none of us knows "why [or how] everything is here". I don't expect theology to ever explain the origin of the universe. I think the nearest we get to understanding the nature of a creator entity, if there is one, [and this is putting it very succinctly] is the laws of physics.
Please acknowledge that you have read and understood this post, KellyJay, so that the next time you pretend that you have never heard me describe my stance as such, it will be crystal clear that you are not conversing with me in good faith.
21 May 22
1 edit
@fmf saidI see what you are saying, but it doesn't align with what you have been saying.
[i]My theories are [1] that there is a creator entity that made everything ["a cause"], and [2] the universe has always existed ["no cause"], but my overarching realization [as I would put it, because it seems patently obvious to me] is that none of us knows "why [or how] everything is here". I don't expect theology to ever explain the origin of the universe. I think the nearest ...[text shortened]... cribe my stance as such, it will be crystal clear that you are not conversing with me in good faith.
You think a creator is possible, but you don't believe in a creator, so there is
option number two the universe always existed. That comes with a lot of baggage,
even more than a creator.
An eternal universe that is only a few billion years old is a contradiction; if you don't
buy into the billions of years, what reason can you give for that outside of your
dislike option number one?
21 May 22
@fmf saidDogma is just a truth that is tightly held; it isn't an insult unless you have been using
The moral nonsense that is integral to your religious beliefs does not create any jeopardy or hazard or dilemma for me. Don't be such a narcissist.
it is as such, and it has grown into something nasty to you.
21 May 22
@kellyjay saidI use the word dogma, when I apply it to you, to refer to what is effectively a curiosity-suffocating and mind-shutting doctrine that you have rote-learned and that you recite as if that is sufficient to sustain a conversation.
Dogma is just a truth that is tightly held; it isn't an insult unless you have been using
it is as such, and it has grown into something nasty to you.