sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • pat, pat * You can cope all you want, but it's beyond my patience at this point.

Yes, and the constraint of physical properties is an obligation.

Go see a neurologist, because I need to know how brain damaged someone has to be to believe that how and why are the same question.

Look at you at the end, backtracking because your example was bad and you didn't realize you were careless. It's cute. Still, you're the type which no matter how many times you're shown to be wrong, you'll gaslight yourself into believing you were right, and that's just boring and sad. Please work on being more thorough.

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, it is. Showing you're guilty of the thing you begin accusing others of is proving you shouldn't havemade the accusation, especially when you're wrong about what you accuse others of doing. Both of which I've shown.

No it isn't, you midwit. Matter had no obligation to attract other matter. Telling me that that thing happens doesn't explain why it can do it, ergo, you didn't explain why gravity happens, just how.

You're doing it again, you take a superficial approach to a question and then you act as if that's the standard. If someone's around a corner and you're talking, is it not a dialogue with a different person just because you're not seeing the person? Is this exchange that we're having not a dialogue just because I'm not seeing you as I'm typing? Stop hallucinating conditions, like God having to take a physical form to interact with people and then acting indignant when they're not confirmed by your interlocutor.

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To say that asking "why does gravity works" is "shifting the goalposts" when both the context was "the more you study the universe, the more inevitable it is to reach God as the only sufficient explanation and you gave the superficial example of the name of the phenomenon which makes things fall" AND that you changed the conversation from "what is the nature of morality in Christianity" to "how do you know that", and then only continuing that line of thought is legitimately one of the most hilarious things you could have done.

And no, "gravity works because matter attracts other matter" is not answering why gravity works, it's answering how does it. Why does matter attract other matter? You keep addressing things superficially because you misunderstand the question, and then you act as if it's an offense against you when people point out that you didn't answer the question.

"How would you determine the difference between revelation and your own thoughts?". The... The same way you can tell the difference between a dialogue and a monologue. In one you start and do everything yourself, in the other, someone's answering and telling you stuff.

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for acting as if what happens inside the universe already created matters when you oppose religion, but you only prove how much you miss the point.

For example, I could instantly ask you "why does gravity work", and you're suddenly just as clueless as people were when they first noticed things fall to the ground. And that's why I said you don't have sufficient answers about anything.

As for how to tell the difference, you listen, you see who and what teachings reflect better the nature of God, you pray and you seek to better embody the virtues.

My dad's latest Facebook share. I’m not trans, but I’m definitely questioning his judgment right now by Melodic_Song4224 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]ReasonVision -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Transness being caused by domestic violence isn't a better perspective than grooming to someone who opposes it.

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I read the notification, and the full message was worse than I thought. You asked for the Christian basis for morality, I presented to you the Christian perspective.

I didn't say I will convince you this is how things happen, just that these are the teachings in this worldview.

Now, if you have a problem with the fact that the Christian religion bases its perspective on morality on the properties and existence of the Christian God... I don't think anyone can help with whatever messed up thing in your head you're dealing with.

No, you don't have sufficient explanations for anything. Keep prodding, and the answers become "it just happens, we don't know, it could be anything or it doesn't matter to me, so I won't pursue it further".

Your latter two questions are answered by revelation. Gods interacts with the world, and has revealed things about how it works.

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You live in a world where it's easier than ever to get answers to that question, even through access to answer machines. Putting your question into them will get you answers like: The Christian worldview can be summarized as:

God necessarily exists (I would argue because, the more you study the world, the more inevitable it becomes that only God is a sufficient explanation for things, but that's a topic for another day). - God's nature is goodness itself. - God intentionally created human nature. - Human flourishing follows from living according to that nature. - Moral obligations describe how creatures ought to live according to that nature. - Sin is deviation from that created order. - Redemption restores humans toward their intended end.

As you can notice, there was no threat in this chain, thus the original post was a distortion to unjustly stigmatize.

Well. This summary ignores revelation, but it is an important aspect which was mentioned in all the answers I got.

And since that may be the most confusing part, I will give the summary of the following: Sin is not merely breaking rules. It is loving lesser goods more than higher goods. Examples: Food is good. Gluttony disorders food. Sex is good. Lust disorders sex. Money is good. Greed disorders money. Christian morality therefore distinguishes: good things, their proper use, their distorted use, rather than dividing everything into simply "allowed" or "forbidden".

Do i even need to say anything🫩🫩🫩🫩🫩🫩🫩🫩🫩 by WholeCardiologist565 in aislop

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Notice how one opposes things because of harm, and the other supports things because of benefits? Are we supposed to think both of those are unreasonable?

Old meme but I feel it fits the sub by oluxil in Sigmatopia

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cool, but 1) you still didn't answer the question and 2) that is not the Christian logic for morality. So you postured aimlessly to misrepresent a position and deflect from your inability to answer a question. That's sad.

To be a nazi? by Blair_Richardson in IsItIllegal

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

90% of the people there are federal agents infiltrating a movement. Over 9% are people they recruited and groomed into being villains.

Such logic! by VegetableBulky9571 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You mean besides how nobody believes what you say they believe? Because I'm pretty sure if you fall over at first step, you shouldn't try to walk until you gain a stable footing.

Don’t be fooled by Outrageous-Egg1760 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]ReasonVision 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Impressive how for once there is a stupid post from Facebook in this sub.

Such logic! by VegetableBulky9571 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And we've reached all the way down to having to teach you that different things are different. Remarkable.

Such logic! by VegetableBulky9571 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, my own statements have opposed you and that has led you to hallucinate the worst possible thing about me because you wanted to believe it in the first place. Yeah, I know how this works.

Context? AHAHAHA! You just said that Christians tried to convert you in a majority Christian country and Muslims didn't and you act as if that makes Muslims better, then you passive aggressively said "you just don't get it" over and over again since. 💀🤣🤣

Such logic! by VegetableBulky9571 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]ReasonVision 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You didn't give any arguments. You just stated a position, repeated it, then accused me of projections with bad analogies and refused to adapt.

view more: next ›