leibowde84
Veteran Member
Why?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I am sceptical of the Skeptics. Is it wrong?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
leibowde84
Veteran Member
There is plenty of evidence that supports the baby learning that it's their father and/or mother.
cambridge79
Active Member
are you implying that your learning standards are the same ones of a toddler?
that would explain lot of things.
Last edited:
Um, the mother and father are right there in front of him to observe. That is the evidence.
Besides, we don't expect a child to be a skeptic or to think rationally straight out of the womb. Skepticism and rational thinking are both learned traits. People make fallacious arguments all the time before they learn how to argue rationally (i.e. "everyone I know says X is true so it must be true", "you can't prove X wrong therefore it is right", "X is true because it is obvious", and so on).
Shad
Veteran Member
No, your verse says seas while your link are very specific rather than a generalization. Your data does not match the verse since it was about an estuary not a sea. Your verse is treating the sea as a complete body of water while you data does not. Try actually reading and understanding what you link
use_your_brain
Active Member
When did FSM does it?
use_your_brain
Active Member
can you elaborate which part of the passage is wrong?
use_your_brain
Active Member
it is the closest approach of the meaning of the texts.
use_your_brain
Active Member
then we can do nothing since it is the fact.
cambridge79
Active Member
If people will already be punished in afterlife for disbelief what's the point of punishing them also in their life for the same crime? I mean in lot of muslim countries blasphemies of all kinds are punished, apostasy is punished and so on, why not let people do what they want if you're all so sure they ok be punished in afterlife?
use_your_brain
Active Member
the earthly punishment may reduce the afterlife punishment.
J. F. Gallant
Member
I agree with this view. I am not religious, and have various valid reasons to be this way. According to the historical definition of an atheist- "one who is without gods"- I am in the strictest sense, an atheist. However, atheism does not define who I am as a person. I am an honest sceptic who prides himself on the proper application of rationality, reason, and logic. I find myself constantly at odds with "militant atheism" which consistently demonstrates itself as a form of "denialism" in which reason and rationality is sacrificed for the sole purpose of denying even an obvious truth for the purpose of satiating a deep hatred for belief systems.
I prefer honest scepticism for the purpose of critical analysis because the truth cannot be discovered when trying to view the world through a lens that is obscured with excessive disdain.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
How do you know that though? How do you know it was meant to be taken literally rather than poetically or allegorically (or something else like that).
use_your_brain
Active Member
what do you think? which one is better?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I think they are both equally valuable in different contexts. And, I wouldn't think it would be one or the other. I would assume some parts are meant to be taken literally and others are meant to be more allegorical. I think that would be the strongest way to write any scripture.
cambridge79
Active Member
oh, so it MAY? You whip a man 100 time so EVENTUALLY god MAY even decide to be mercyful? seriously does it even make sense? that sounds dangerously like people burning witches "for their good"
you're a believer right? do you think i would be able to beat atheism into you? I mean do you think i can whip you and beat you and hurt you to a point that you will spontaneosly realize that maybe i have a point? Or is it just useless suffering?
because remember that god can see in your heart, so if i whip you for example because you're gay after the whipping you are still gay, than you're still a sinner to god, so whipping is pointless aniway
use_your_brain
Active Member
to me after life punishment does not make sense either, let alone eternal brutal sadistic punishment . anyway, what we can do? nothing.
or do I answer it in mistake? I mean do you oppose earthly punishment or after life punishment?
cambridge79
Active Member
we can stop punishing people for blasphemy for a start and than god will sort this out for himself, i'm pretty sure if he exists he has the ability to do that.
So you doubt about the daily news broadcast and have to dig up every piece of evidence yourself? Are you insisting on going to the ISIS sites to see how they execute before you consider what's said by the news agencies or what?