Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

[Theunis]

You are just bent on delusion. Reality is the holocaust, the threat of thermonuclear war, and total environmental destruction of the earth. The reality is that people reject subjectivity, the head vs heart struggle rages furiously, destroying the heart. An atheist does not do subjectivity, opinion, this is why they always ask for proof, because they only do objectivity, facts. What is obvious in this case is also the truth of it.

In all sincerity I do so hope you read the information furnished by wisemen from your religion. If not here is it again. ( MAY HE WHO SEES YOU SEE YOU IN ALL THE LOVE AND KINDNESS YOU NOW IN YOUR IRE DO NOT EXHIBIT TO OTHERS)
http://islam.ru/en/content/story/golden-rule-islam

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

In all sincerity I do so hope you read the information furnished by wisemen from your religion. If not here is it again. ( MAY HE WHO SEES YOU SEE YOU IN ALL THE LOVE AND KINDNESS YOU NOW IN YOUR IRE DO NOT EXHIBIT TO OTHERS)
http://islam.ru/en/content/story/golden-rule-islam

I won't have a problem with that because scripture as well as common sense says it is righteous to keep discipline in faith. There will be unequivocal acceptance of the validity of subjectivity, or else. And even when subjectivity is accepted as valid, then still many opinions about what is good or evil, will be challenged as immoral.

You have the problem of associating to people who reject subjectivity, nazi's, communists, atheists, materialists, naturalists, physicalists, scientists, and all that nonsense. How great these nazi's oppressors of subjectivity are, you say, what fine people. You will have to answer for that.

 

[Theunis]

apparently you will never come to terms as used in belief

Quite so he is too far caught up in his own subjective belief system. He is like a frog living in a tiny puddle with blinkers on. He cannot see the ocean beyond the horizon.

What tickles me is he says you never proselytize and in the next breath he says you do it all the time! How can we give credibility to someone who makes such contradictory statements ?

 

[Thief]

Quite so he is too far caught up in his own subjective belief system. He is like a frog living in a tiny puddle with blinkers on. He cannot see the ocean beyond the horizon.

What tickles me is he says you never proselytize and in the next breath he says you do it all the time! How can we give credibility to someone who makes such contradictory statements ?

true.....so true....
but when it suits me I use his denials to springboard my belief.
using the antagonist......

 

[Theunis]

I won't have a problem with that because scripture as well as common sense says it is righteous to keep discipline in faith. There will be unequivocal acceptance of the validity of subjectivity, or else. And even when subjectivity is accepted as valid, then still many opinions about what is good or evil, will be challenged as immoral.

You have the problem of associating to people who reject subjectivity, nazi's, communists, atheists, materialists, naturalists, physicalists, scientists, and all that nonsense. How great these nazi's oppressors of subjectivity are, you say, what fine people. You will have to answer for that.

No I do not associate myself with them. Although many, as you yourself now exhibit bare your subjectivity by making incorrect assumptions concerning me and others.

He is too far caught up in his own subjective belief system. He is like a frog living in a tiny puddle with blinkers on. He cannot see the ocean beyond the horizon.

From my experience I have never ever met someone who does not use subjectivity. There are many who try to deny it but all fail.

 

[Theunis]

true.....so true....
but when it suits me I use his denials to springboard my belief.
using the antagonist......

You must be very careful with him though - He does not know the difference between - some, many, most or all.
When, on another thread I said - many atheists - he intimated that I knew not what I was talking about! If I had said most or all then I would have conceded his point.

 

[Kartari]

Hi Mohammad,

No the fact is that beauty is a matter of opinion, and cannot be demonstrated to be real in any way whatsoever. Which is because agency of any decision cannot be demonstrated in any way whatsoever.

While the perception of beauty is indeed subjective, both (a) our capacity to respond to beauty and (b) the effects of our responses can, in fact, be demonstrated to exist in reality. We understand that our brains are the physical source of our capacity to feel awe at the beauty we perceive in a gorgeous sunrise or sunset, at a piece of renaissance artwork, or at the sight of a beautiful person. While we might individually differ in our opinions on how beautiful this or that is, we know it is true that all possess the capacity to perceive beauty. We can also measure changes in body chemistry as such experiences are experienced. You will be hard pressed to find someone who believes that beauty is not something people actually perceive and experience, Mohammad.

Concerning the belief in deities, the same holds true. The belief in deities is a real phenomenon. I sincerely doubt that all theists are liars, which would be the only alternative explanation. So many people claim that their believed-in deity or deities actually do exist in reality.

That people believe in them is not what is generally questioned by atheists, though. What is questioned is the actual existence of those deities in reality. Whereas inspiration from beauty and other subjective feelings (e.g. love for another person, anger at another person, etc.) are understood as phenomena that really occur in the brain and are responses to real phenomena (to objects of beauty, to beloved others, etc.), deities have yet to be demonstrated to exist beyond the confines of human imagination.

Your analogy thus fails, because you are comparing the subjective perceptions of beauty to the objective existence of a deity or deities, whereas the more accurate analogy would be between two subjective perceptions: of beauty, and the belief in a deity or deities.

 

[leibowde84]

paarsurrey said: ↑
Because G-d claims it .
Regards


I am as certain (or even more or most or absolute certain) that G-d exists as I am certain that I have a father or ancestors and distant ancestor fathers that existed million of years ago since inception. It must be one's assumption that God does not exist just out of one's being sceptic, else one should give one's evidence that God does not exist. Please don't enumerate any hypothetical/mythical names that one does not believe in oneself.
Regards

It is always the burden of those claiming that an entity exists to provide evidence to back up that claim. Asking to prove a negative is absurdly unreasonable.

 

[Shad]

It is a fact how subjectivity works, because that decisions are made is still a matter of fact, eventhough agency of the decisions is a matter of opinion.

It is a fact that creationism is consistent with the logic used in common discourse. Both in common discourse and creationism subjectivity uses a logic of freedom. That freedom is empirically real and relevant in the universe, mathematical analysis of empirical data shows that to be the case.

Creationism fails the soundness parameter of logic thus is still only an opinion. An opinion anyone can reject. It does nothing to resolve your issue with double standards. You put forward an opinion then reject other opinion when it does not agree with your own then you go off on a rant about science. For example I have no reason to accept spirit nor spiritual domain hence I disagree with your opinion.

 

[serp777]

That you do not acknowledge freedom is real, is very obvious total destruction of any and all subjectivity.

I said true freedom doesn't exist; that doesn't mean we dont at least have some freedoms. And even if freedom isnt real then it doesnt destroy subjectivity. Slaves still have as much subjectivity as non slaves. They have interpretation, personal opinions, etc, thus disproving your assertion that freedom is a necessary condition for subjectivity.

 

[Theunis]

I said true freedom doesn't exist; that doesn't mean we dont at least have some freedoms. And even if freedom isnt real then it doesnt destroy subjectivity. Slaves still have as much subjectivity as non slaves. They have interpretation, personal opinions, etc, thus disproving your assertion that freedom is a necessary condition for subjectivity.

Notwithstanding man made laws I have the freedom to reject them all.
If I wish to murder someone then I will. If I decide to commit suicide then I will. Man is a god unto himself and has utter freedom to do as he pleases. However he is not alone in this world and as such through experience finds himself in situations of cause and effect which he uses in many ways for what he considers a better life. This causes subjective thought patterns and gives the false impression that he has no free will or freedom of choice yet in the same breath it confirms that he has the utter freedom to choose as it please him.

On the other points you raise I agree with your conclusions.

 

[outhouse]

I said true freedom doesn't exist

I don't agree.

Its all in how you define "true" I do not define it how you wish

 

[Theunis]

Creationism fails the soundness parameter of logic thus is still only an opinion. An opinion anyone can reject. It does nothing to resolve your issue with double standards. You put forward an opinion then reject other opinion when it does not agree with your own then you go off on a rant about science. For example I have no reason to accept spirit nor spiritual domain hence I disagree with your opinion.

Van Gogh created some beautiful paintings, Bach and others created some wonderful classic music. They used things that already existed. God also used the so called dust - meaning an existing element on earth, to create man. Genesis 1:26 clearly states he asked the earth to bring forth things according to their kind which the earth did and he found them good and blessed them. Yes here god accepted evolution as a fact or do you think this is all subjective thoughts on my part!
You with your argument are subjectively doing exactly what you accuse others of doing. I am only saying this to point out the exceedingly fine threads we use in our arguments that are so fine that we do not realize it is the same arguments as used by others- yes it is subjectivity.

 

[outhouse]

man made laws

Every law you have ever known is factually man made.

 

[Theunis]

It is always the burden of those claiming that an entity exists to provide evidence to back up that claim. Asking to prove a negative is absurdly unreasonable.

What is this wafting on the breeze of a typical atheist/theist reply. It smacks of pondering the imponderable.
Saying prove the esoteric has no meaning for you must personally experience it to know it.

 

[outhouse]

What is this wafting

Stating he obvious is not wafting.

Anyone can dance around reason using philosophy. But not successfully.

 

[Theunis]

Every law you have ever known is factually man made.

Oh no my friend since when did we make laws concerning of say the attraction or repulsion etc of Atoms or sub-atomic particles etc. We only observed them and then gave words to what we observed.

 

[outhouse]

God also used the so called dust

Rhetoric, you cannot substantiate

 

[outhouse]

Oh no my friend since when did we make laws concerning of say the attraction or repulsion etc of Atoms or sub-atomic particles etc. We only observed them and then gave words to what we observed.

When man defines something, he defines the law creating said law regarding nature.

Only man makes these laws to describe nature.

But context is key, no god has ever created a law. Only man recorded laws.

 

[leibowde84]

What is this wafting on the breeze of a typical atheist/theist reply. It smacks of pondering the imponderable.
Saying prove the esoteric has no meaning for you must personally experience it to know it.

I am only speaking to those who claim that God is necessary for things like the complexity of life, the beginning of life, the big bang, etc. and support this claim with various God of the Gaps arguments.