@kellyjay saidNo matter how many times you refer to articles of your own faith as "true", it makes no difference. You could be asserting that the narratives of the Hindu Gods were "true", and you could repeat it ad nauseam, and cite your own certainty too, as if it were an "argument", and THAT wouldn't make any difference either.
It isn't true because you or I believe this or that, we can agree, and that doesn't mean it is true.
@fmf saidYou will have to explain how anyone can make it up as they go, and it not be a license to do what you will. If it is up to the individual, anything goes as they see fit; if you start applying numbers, the larger the group gets to decide, we go back to the strong overpowering the weak. Explain your rationale that anyone can believe what they will, and it is not okay to do what they will if they can justify it to themselves, please.
If you think your moral compass is based on supernatural revelation, that's OK. Billions of people do.
Moral codes in cultures and societies have evolved due to the necessities of communal living. Individuals' moral compasses interact with these values and norms [and laws attendant thereto].
These cultures and societies more often than not conflated the values that they d ...[text shortened]... a lack of understanding of how psychology and anthropology shape the reality out there in the world.
@fmf saidYou are the only one of us locked into declaring what is true is essential by who is saying it; I'm not. Look at what we see around us and see what best fits all of our evidence. If you ignore anything by definition, that is not looking; it is simply applying blinders out of hand.
No matter how many times you refer to articles of your own faith as "true", it makes no difference. You could be asserting that the narratives of the Hindu Gods were "true", and you could repeat it ad nauseam, and cite your own certainty too, as if it were an "argument", and THAT wouldn't make any difference either.
I am not concerned about your beliefs; we can avoid talking about one another, instead talk about what makes more sense what is reasonable. Saying you only say that because you believe that is not an argument, everyone talks about what they believe that isn't a revelation in any sense of the word.
@kellyjay said"Evidence" of what?
Look at what we see around us and see what best fits all of our evidence. If you ignore anything by definition, that is not looking; it is simply applying blinders out of hand.
"Evidence" that your religious beliefs are "true"?
"What best fits"?
"Fits" what?
I am looking. I am not ignoring anything. I am not wearing blinders.
This is nothing more than a volley of mini-strawmen.
@kellyjay saidAll you are offering here are your personal opinions and beliefs. Everything you insist "makes more sense what is reasonable" is just a set of dogmatized personal opinions. I respond to what you say, nevertheless. If you are not "concerned" about my beliefs, then perhaps you should talk to someone else.
I am not concerned about your beliefs; we can avoid talking about one another, instead talk about what makes more sense what is reasonable.
1 edit
@fmf saidThen, stop telling me I believe something, and you believe something else as if that were the discussion; it isn't. The reasons that support the belief systems matter not that we have them; everyone has them.
Nonsense. You are the one who is insisting that your subjective opinions are objective facts and absolute truth. Not me.
@kellyjay said"Makes more sense what is reasonable" to whom?
I am not concerned about your beliefs; we can avoid talking about one another, instead talk about what makes more sense what is reasonable.
To You? To me?
How can you want to talk about what makes more sense what is reasonable while [1] not acknowledging that all you have to offer are YOUR beliefs, and while [2] stating you are not concerned about MY beliefs?
@kellyjay saidYour beliefs and the reasons you have them are all in the realm of your personal opinions. We cannot discuss your beliefs and your reasons for them without exchanging our personal beliefs.
The reasons that support the belief systems matter not that we have them; everyone has them.
@kellyjay said[1] Surely you believe that people can believe what they want to believe, right?
Explain your rationale that anyone can believe what they will, and it is not okay to do what they will if they can justify it to themselves, please.
[2] Who has suggested it's okay for people to do whatever they want "if they can justify it to themselves"?
@kellyjay saidWho has suggested that, for an individual living in a society, "anything goes as they see fit"? Please desist with these strawmen, post after post after post.
If it is up to the individual, anything goes as they see fit; if you start applying numbers, the larger the group gets to decide, we go back to the strong overpowering the weak.
@bigdogg saidIf I may interject here, Christian dogma is that the human soul is corrupt and refuses to believe the truth even if shown it. Contrary to what KJ keeps insisting, truth does not do it, even objective Truth revealed by God. Man must be saved against his will, in spite of himself.
If I may interject -- there is absolutely no guarantee that a given person will believe something, even when that something is objectively true.
Case in point: flat earthers.
Case in point: people who witnessed miracles performed by Jesus during his lifetime and still did not get the message.
Case in point: people who read the Bible and still fail to love God and their neighbours as themselves.
@kellyjay saidIf you think if there is no God then everyone may do whatever he wants, then I heartily recommend that you continue to believe in God, because I do not wish to share a planet with you if you think you may do whatever you want in the absence of eternal punishments.
I believe a standard comes from above us, yours; it seems to be whatever anyone wants, which isn't a standard at all, just a license to do what you will.