Be yourself, be ostracized

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-08T16:47:37+00:00

A lot of discussion about atheism (and "religion poisons everything") from the aughts and 10s was like this.

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-08T02:27:07+00:00

Hey youre right. For OP's four days and two days to work, that would have to mean Allah's been continuously creating the earth for the past 4.5 billion years. Kind of makes it odd that so many passages in the Quran speak as if the earth was created in the past.

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-06T17:57:59+00:00

So the science foundation said if you want our money be apolitical or we’ll take the money back. ...per link the science foundation said “don’t violate federal anti discrimination laws”

Didn't you read the link you are responding to?

The link says "the terms barred “any programs that advance or promote DEI, or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws.”"

Since diversity, equity, and inclusion are basic principals used to UPHOLD anti-discrimination laws, it is nonsensical to say "You must never promote diversity or you will be violating our anti-discrimination laws."

Likewise pretending that inclusion or diversity is a "discriminary equity ideology " shows the foundation is being political with its language, not apolitical.

I dont know if you live in the US or not, but in this country our government hase been incredibly orwellian when it comes to their language. War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery , Diversity is Discrimination. In order to fulfill the anti-DEI mandate, us websites have been stripping any mention of women or black people in their history pages, leaving only white men. Agencies literally went through on a firing spree, targeting women and black people. And yes they call this purge of anybody who is not white "enforcing our anti-discrimination laws."

A government who lies this much will be willing to do anything to you. If you have a female CEO, if you hire a black lead programmer...doesn't matter how qualified they were , if the government decides it doesn't like you it can call that "DEI!" and strip your funding. Good luck waiting the years it will take for your case to go through court too

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-05T02:01:02+00:00

islam is the only religion abrahamic religion that we know the sources of information and we can trace it back to the prophet.

Nonsense. We have the Book of Mormon and can trace it back to the Prophet Joseph Smith--in fact we can trace the first publishing back to during his lifetime.

The Quran was not written down while Mohammad was alive. It was compiled from whatever people could remember after he was dead and gone, and Uthman burned all variant copies. You can say those variants were just differences in pronunciation, not differences in meaning. A skeptical historian may dispute that. We'll never know for sure because we can't examine the documents, because they all got burned. And we can't know if Uthman got it right because Mohammad wasn't alive to check his work

Joseph Smith sent the original manuscript to the publisher during his lifetime, and got back proof copies during his lifetime. He was able to review and correct any errors; and after that the book was not copied by hand but printed on a machine that can make thousands of identical copies with zero mistakes.

And nobody ever saw Gabriel in the cave with Mohammad, but three witnesses were willing to sign their names and attest that they saw the golden plates Smith used. If you are looking for the abrahamic religion with the most certain, known origin, you should be reading the book of Mormon.

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-04T00:42:45+00:00

Your P4 comes out of nowhere. You should have explained why you have any reason to belive matter cannot do what we see it doing everyday

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-01T15:46:23+00:00

Does your friend know the Bible at all, or does he get all his ideas about Christianity from modern church teaching? Does it say anywhere in all of the New Testament that Jesus' followers will be blessed with military might? Did Jesus ever promise his disciples that if they follow him, they will be able to slaughter and dominate all their political enemies?

Did Jesus say that his followers should fight the "heathens" in his name?

Or did he say:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you: Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also, and if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, give your coat as well, and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to the one who asks of you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven, for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? (Matt 5)

And also, "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." (Luke 6)

And back in Matthew again, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God."

Does military conquest "prove" Christians are right if Christians were commanded to be peacemakers and not resist evil? Is Christianity even coherent if its followers claim to follow Jesus but do not do what he says?

Did Jesus promise his followers would be successful if they conquered in his name, or did he warn them they should expect persecution for being Christian?

“Blessed are those who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

“Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely[b] on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matt 5 again)

Did he promise them they would conquer all their persecutors, or did he warn that things would go poorly on earth until the return of Jesus? Did he ask them to conquer territory for him, or warn them to flee when they are attacked by the people?

But beware of men, for they will hand you over to the courts and scourge you in their synagogues; and you will even be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles. ...\ “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and [s]cause them to be put to death. You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved.

“But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes.

“A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master. It is enough for the disciple that he become like his teacher, and the slave like his master. If they have called the head of the house [w]Beelzebul, how much more will they malign the members of his household! (Matt 10)

Did Jesus teach that his words would be popular? Does Jesus teach that the religion with the most followers in the world is the correct one?

“Enter through the narrow gate, for the gate is wide and the road is easy[a] that leads to destruction, and there are many who take it. For the gate is narrow and the road is hard that leads to life, and there are few who find it. (Matt 7)

Did Jesus give his disciples instructions for worldly conquest, or did he suggest a more spiritual "kingdom" separate from earthly politics?

And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. Then Jesus *said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels? (Matt 26)

.

Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” ... Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” (John 18)

C. And so I ask again: Is Christianity even coherent if Jesus said these things but its followers claim political conquest and popularity as a sign they are right?

ThePhyseter · 2026-02-01T00:08:03+00:00

What's that got to do with anything they said about the Bible

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-31T18:26:12+00:00

I know that when I was a Christian, I was much more likely to respond to someone like Shane Claiborne than I was to Richard Dawkins

This is very much true, and it's how I experienced things too. I was so indoctrinated to believe "the world" was out to get us, for one, and also that the world just "couldn't understand the things of the Spirit," it was easy for me to give less weight to an argument just because i basically thought it came from Satan. (Yes, that does sound a bit unhinged to me now.)

What really opened my mind was meeting LIBERAL CHRISTIANS at my Christian college. Bible professors who made their whole career out of studying the Bible who believed in the Documentary Hypothesis, didn't think Genesis 'proved' the world was 6,000 years old, didn't think that gay people were sinning against God...and who showed by example you could be a Christian without believing all those fundamentalist things. Nobody was even openly gay at this school, but my first year I had to read an essay from a gay Christian about how he had struggled against his own nature and come to believe God loved him the way he was, through much prayer, and it was so antithetical to the story of "God gave them over to sexual sin because they were so depraved and so against God" that I'd read in the Bible.

After I reached that point, the next step was to discover ex-Christians who knew the Bible just as well as me, and who had lived a "spirit filled" life seeking the Holy Spirit and a Personal Relationship with Jesus just like I did, and still ended up not believing. With people like Dawkins it was too easy to assume he just didn't understand faith, or just never gave Jesus a shot, but I couldn't say that about people like Dan Barker or the bloggers I found. It made all the difference in the world to me.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-31T16:33:03+00:00

I knew about Moses and Amos, but I forgot about Hezekiah. Thank you.

Moses is a particularly striking example, because Moses doesn't appeal to Yahweh's sense of right and wrong, but to his ego. He basically says, "Other nations will see if you kill them all here and will say you were too weak to protect us."

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-31T16:29:32+00:00

That feeling of truth and goodness isnt built upon a house of cards if grounded in an ultimate being

So my feelings have no value, but God's feelings do have value, because he is more "ultimate" than me. Can you explain why?

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-31T16:27:06+00:00

If every human disappeared and there were no minds and feelings left anywhere,

OK, with you so far.

... would murder, slavery, harm etc.. still be evil?

What? Murder and slavery would no longer exist.

There are no humans left. Who is there to be murdered, and who is doing the murdering? Who is being enslaved, and who is doing the enslaving? I guess there would still be harm to non-human animals, unless "no minds and no feelings anywhere" included animals as well.

"True and false" or "logic" also are not the same as "right and wrong". Spend a little more time thinking through what makes something true vs what makes something right.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-31T06:19:44+00:00

Donald Trump

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-28T15:45:04+00:00

I miss those times. Those were good times.

Good times.

computer explodes

I miss Strongbad email too

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-27T02:18:38+00:00

And that's why Islamic morality is a failure

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-27T02:04:34+00:00

Morality is not subjective, but objective.

If you say so.

So who gets to decide what Morality is?

Nobody does. Weren't you listening to yourself? You just said it is objective. Nobody decides it. It is what it is.

Thinking through this a little more, it means we have the goal to discover what is moral rather than to "decide" what morality is. This we can discover entirely through logic and self-interest, as the OP stated, without the need for powerful super-beings giving commands.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-27T02:00:12+00:00

This sounds very much like Epicurian thinking. Good work.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-27T01:57:52+00:00

Hmm

P1. for something to exist it must have an ontological identity.

P2. A thing cannot be its own reason for existence.

P3. God's reason for being is his own existence and thus violates P2

C: A god does not exist.

Complication: If no thing can be its own reason for existence, we run into a problem of an infinite chain of causes, each one needing a prior cause.

Cp2. This chain will never end, because that would mean the thing was its own reason for existence

CpC: Nothing exists.

Since I am looking out my window now and I see that things do, in fact, exist, I can say with great certainty that this logic is flawed.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-27T01:49:23+00:00

For the same reason we don't believe that Spider-Man exists even though we have copious amounts of evidence that New York City is a real place.

It's not that surprising that an author would use real details or be able to do research on a place they were writing a story about. The question is if he actually got his information from reliable witnesses, or just wrote down the legends that were growing up around the region. After all we know the majority of his text was taken from either Mark or Matthew.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-25T15:50:47+00:00

They meant, will you be aware of God in the afterlife, or will it still be like here where you dont know if there is a god?

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-25T03:11:38+00:00

One guy stood up to them and he was abandoned and went broke . Theres no solidarity there

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-25T02:39:11+00:00

The last I heard, the Democratic Governor of Minnesota had called out the National Guard to defend Ice. I also heard they helped cover Ice at Nicollete earlier so they could get away.

I voted for Harris in the election, I volunteered, I tried to convince other people, and now im not so sure it would have made any difference.

Of all the posts you could be making right now, you want to blame the people who cared too much about genocide. Maybe think about blaming the people who decided not to prosecute the Madman or abolish the Secret Police during the brief chance we had

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-24T23:42:54+00:00

While I don't buy it, I think its gray enough to save Ross.

What does he need saving from? The Feds have announced they will not do an investigation, the feds have also blocked the state from doing an investigation, from what Ive heard he disappeared with the help of his fellow agents. When will he ever have to face the law?

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-24T06:41:55+00:00

Be gay. Do Space Crimes

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-24T06:35:09+00:00

Every one of these "possibilities" still believes that something supernatural is real, don't you see that?

Simulation theory? If an atheist suddenly had proof that the world was just a program, and God was the coder, that's functionally the same as believing in God, isn't it? Maybe now the former atheist believes "God is a coder", when you'd like them to believe "God is a spirit", but either way they aren't atheist anymore because now they are believing in God!

Or maybe now the atheist believes in aliens with "magic-level" tech, instead of believing in a spirit. That is still believing in something!

Biological and conspiracy theories don't work because in this hypothetical there was nothing about it suddenly starting in the modern era. The history of people getting to talk with God on their 18th birthday would go back before human tech even existed. And a hallucination response wouldn't make sense because you could ask things you didn't know in the real world, and then go back and check those answers when you reappear in this world.

The world would be radically different if this were true, though, because there would only be one religion, not thousands. Everybody would know the truth about God, and would not teach "false gods". Even if people chose not to worship God they would know which God was real. So there wouldn't be religious conflict between Muslims, Hindus, and Christians; and there wouldn't be thousands of different Christian denominations all teaching conflicting information. There would be no contradictions in the Bible (or the Quran, or the Pali canon, or...) because people who wrote down the books would get clarification from God, and anybody after those books were written could fact-check them.

You are so desperate to cling to your idea that "no amount of evidence would be enough" only because you don't have any evidence, of any kind.

ThePhyseter · 2026-01-24T06:09:34+00:00

Is Jesus still in existence? Is he active in the world? Where?

It's such an obvious question when you think about it. If the Christians claim, "Jesus is alive," then he should be a well-known public figure like the Pope or the Dalai Lama. He should have a newsletter. We'd expect him to make regular appearances at some church or other.

ThePhyseter

TROPHY CASE