• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

It never ceases to amaze me...

Can't objective and subjective realities both exist at the same time? I'm in my own subjective reality, and I'm not equipped with the capabilities to define the exact parameters of the objective reality. Sure, my subjective reality isn't completely real, but it's probably not very far off unless I have a mental disease or something.

I might just be rehashing what Harthan and Ricky said. If so, carry on.
 
Maybe. I don't doubt you, so take no offense when I say this, but most of the time when people tell me I'll like their church for one reason or another, the result ends up being largely the same. I don't.

Totally understandable. We'd say we understand and hope that you find one you do like and say you're welcome back anytime.
 
Science is a word, so why is it authoritative?

The word "science" is not authoritative. The scientific method, that proves things via empirical study, is authoritative. If love had a method, that proved things via trail and error, and came to empirical conclusions that could be backed up with numbers and statistics that prove their legitimacy, I would call it authoritative. I don't understand why you are comparing love to science. It's like apples and oranges. Rather, it's like apples and monkeys. Come on Ricky, that is the weakest argument I've heard in a long time.
 
The word "science" is not authoritative. The scientific method, that proves things via empirical study, is authoritative. If love had a method, that proved things via trail and error, and came to empirical conclusions that could be backed up with numbers and statistics that prove their legitimacy, I would call it authoritative. I don't understand why you are comparing love to science. It's like apples and oranges. Rather, it's like apples and monkeys. Come on Ricky, that is the weakest argument I've heard in a long time.

Ok, "scientific method." That's a word that is a symbol for something...object representation. And the same applies for love. And Ricky. And Mike Killam.



You're still choosing to place authority into a particular way of looking at the world, which is essentially no different than what the religious person does. The religious person's method just isn't as governed by Enlightenment thinking.
 
Ok, "scientific method." That's a word that is a symbol for something...object representation. And the same applies for love. And Ricky. And Mike Killam.



You're still choosing to place authority into a particular way of looking at the world, which is essentially no different than what the religious person does. The religious person's method just isn't as governed by Enlightenment thinking.

But...the scientific method isn't a philosophy. It's not a concept, or a way of looking at the world. It's not a symbol for anything. It's quite simply...a method. I believe CONCEPT A. I am going to prove CONCEPT A by doing STEPS 1-10. If at any point it fails, I will add or subtract variables and continue repeating until my results can be duplicated enough to prove legitimacy.

I don't look at the world through the scientific method. Nor do I "view the world" through anything but my own two eyes. I think you're using these vague, grand "Christianese" terms that, when you break them down, don't actually mean anything. Like "love proves that God exists". It sounds super nice. You could write it down on a Hallmark card. But what in the heck does it mean? How does love prove that God exists. Prove to me how love proves God's existence.
 
But...the scientific method isn't a philosophy. It's not a concept, or a way of looking at the world. It's not a symbol for anything. It's quite simply...a method. I believe CONCEPT A. I am going to prove CONCEPT A by doing STEPS 1-10. If at any point it fails, I will add or subtract variables and continue repeating until my results can be duplicated enough to prove legitimacy.

Wrong. wrong. wrong. wrong. The things that you do...the "steps"...that's what is represented by the symbol of the word(s) "scientific method." And legitimacy is something that you are, at some level, choosing to accept as authoritative. Because it makes sense to you. Choice. Context.

HGR said:
I don't look at the world through the scientific method. Nor do I "view the world" through anything but my own two eyes. I think you're using these vague, grand "Christianese" terms that, when you break them down, don't actually mean anything. Like "love proves that God exists". It sounds super nice. You could write it down on a Hallmark card. But what in the heck does it mean? How does love prove that God exists. Prove to me how love proves God's existence.

I don't recall saying anything in here that is distinctly "Christian." I think I made a sensible hypothesis for theist belief in a general sense, regardless of the title (or symbol) that is slapped on it. I did not say that love proved the existence of God. I simply suggested that that is the best hope for the future of religiosity. And I will not prove that God exists, because I cannot.
 
Wrong. wrong. wrong. wrong.
This is probably the best way to start your rebuttal, as to not upset your opposition and maintain civil discussion.

I feel like the more we get into this, the more it will become a debate of semantics. I am really exhausted, and I would rather start over again when well-rested, and can make sure what I say best accurately represents what I mean. I've already fudged up some of the points I've wanted to make. I should have been asleep two hours ago, and would have been had it not been for that damn troupe of lunatic doomsday Christians.

If you want to, you can pick this up again tomorrow and I'll be happy to participate. If not...agree to disagree?
 
This is probably the best way to start your rebuttal, as to not upset your opposition and maintain civil discussion.

I feel like the more we get into this, the more it will become a debate of semantics. I am really exhausted, and I would rather start over again when well-rested, and can make sure what I say best accurately represents what I mean. I've already fudged up some of the points I've wanted to make. I should have been asleep two hours ago, and would have been had it not been for that damn troupe of lunatic doomsday Christians.

If you want to, you can pick this up again tomorrow and I'll be happy to participate. If not...agree to disagree?

I am a few time zones behind you, and likely have the same symptoms in larger severity. :)

Yes, to be continued...
 
I don't know much about religion but I thought it was fairly well known that the real Jesus was, among other things, an apocalyptic preacher.
 
I live in the "Bible Belt Buckle" of Kentucky. I attend Church semi-regularly. My preacher carries a gun at all times, and shows up to Church on a Harley 9 times out of 10. Occasionally, he drives the Bus to take children home. He fired a blank out of his 22 to kick off deer season, of course this was tied into his message. Side note- Our youth pastor's wife just went in front of everyone this past Sunday and asked for forgiveness for committing adultery. I wasn't there, but I hear you could cut the tension in that room with a knife. The youth pastor happens to be my cousin. At least 10 of my family members (aunts, siblings, grandma, and cousins) go to this church. I have heard stories by half of them about how my cousins wife should quote "go to hell."

Just felt like this fit.
 
While I can certainly understand why people feel the need to minister to the world (I can't get away from it in my family, Cincinnati and the outlying areas are just as steeped in religion as Kentucky), I would think they'd at least have the decency to do it at a reasonable time.

Also, what Norcal said.
 
Never underestimate the power of denial. People will believe anything that makes them feel better or stops them being afraid, no matter how utterly fucking ridiculous it is.
 
Oh dear. If the Bible belt had it's own Bible belt, and that belt had a buckle, it would be Kentucky. Or so I've heard.

That'd be in Tennessee. There's one store in the entire county of 100,000 people I live in that can sell alcohol because there's a law here that you can't sell alcohol within 100 foot of a church.

There's currently somewhere around 500 churches in my town of 160 sq miles thus making it nearly impossible to sell alcohol anywhere except for 1 store.

I'm pretty sure we're the buckle. :lmao:
 
That'd be in Tennessee. There's one store in the entire county of 100,000 people I live in that can sell alcohol because there's a law here that you can't sell alcohol within 100 foot of a church.

There's currently somewhere around 500 churches in my town of 160 sq miles thus making it nearly impossible to sell alcohol anywhere except for 1 store.

I'm pretty sure we're the buckle. :lmao:

Churches that think alcohol is evil make me laugh. Dat der Jesus grape Kool-aide miracle, yep.
 
Religion is an absurd enough notion on it's own — the fact that anyone could try to sell it to me at the start of primetime television hours is just lunacy.
 
Religion is an absurd enough notion on it's own — the fact that anyone could try to sell it to me at the start of primetime television hours is just lunacy.
hSFeX.gif
 
I get up, put some pants on, and slowly make my way to the front door.

I usually take my pants off before opening the door. They usually don't stick around very long if the guy there talking to's flaccid penis is just hanging out.

If it's a woman, I'll chub it up a bit.
 
I usually take my pants off before opening the door. They usually don't stick around very long if the guy there talking to's flaccid penis is just hanging out.

If it's a woman, I'll chub it up a bit.

What do you do when it is gay marriage advocates?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,826
Messages
3,300,735
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top