Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#1593 May 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Good one, Falice.
Thanks, Bama.

Nice pic. 72, is that your age or IQ?
Thinking

London, UK

#1594 May 16, 2013
Jainism is not for me, because I like driving.

Unless of course, Jain deities start keeping insects away from my windscreen.
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
But I have to admit if I had to select a religion it would be Jainism.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1595 May 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
The historian Tacitus would have been alive then.
Are you saying the historian was lying?
I'm fairly sure he would have been lying, HAD he actually claimed to have been around when Jesus was.

What, with being born around 20 years after the allegded zombie story took place that is.(shrug)
Buck Crick wrote:
For what reason, since he discounted the christian narrative?
Or are you just flapping your lip again?
Yes, he did discount the Christian the Christian narrative, as did most Romans at the time until a few centuries later when eventually Christianity became the dominant religion. Taking that into accout it is fair to say that he CANNOT be used to support the existence of Jesus any more than Josephus can.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1596 May 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
All religions are false. They are false because the doctrines and rules are believed to be "Truth".
This means others are not in possession of "Truth". Thus, it is in the service of EGO that the religion is used.
The ego is the devil. Metaphorically. It is the only devil there is or ever was, and if something calling itself "religion" serves it, then it cannot be a good thing.
There is only one "Truth". It can never be put into words, it can only be experienced.
Jesus tried to convey this by saying "I am the way, THE TRUTH, and the life". The Hindus called this the "Atman", the in-dwelling god.
When you are enlightened of that inner truth, you become aware of the essence identity - the part of God in every living thing.
This is your natural state. You are the truth. It is the condition in which you came here. Psychologists refer to the infant's perspective as "oceanic consciousness" - seeing others as part of itself. They are hungry, and to them, a breast appears as if from within them.
This "Truth" comes from no physical event or act of any person in history. It is eternal and all attempts to put it into words formed from 5 vowels and a few consonants only limits it.
Once it is described, the description is in error. These descriptions, however, are used to serve the ego with an illusion of superiority, and thus divide and harm all who contact it.
Thus you have no more special acess to "TEH TRUTH" than anyone else does on the entire planet.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1597 May 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The ages have Aquinas and Aristotle.
On Topix, we have Polymouth and The Dude.
We are so blessed.
And we have the benefit of knowing that heavy objects don't simply fall faster than lighter ones just because they're heavier. Your reverence of philosophers and apologists is, well, quite expected really.
Imhotep

Ocala, FL

#1598 May 16, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Jainism is not for me, because I like driving.
Unless of course, Jain deities start keeping insects away from my windscreen.
<quoted text>
It's not for me either but the tenets of this religion far outweigh the tenets of any other religions.

There won't be any Jain wars of conquest or power grabs... If anything one could say they are too peaceful! ;)

Jainism dates to the 6th century B.C.E. in India. The religion derives its name from the jinas ("conquerors"), a title given to twenty-four great teachers (tirthankaras or "ford-makers"), through whom their faith was revealed. Mahavira, the last of the tirthankaras, is considered the founder of Jainism.

The ultimate goal of Jainism the liberation of the self (jiva) from rebirth, which is attained through the elimination of accumulated karma (the consequences of previous actions).

This occurs through both the disciplined cultivation of knowledge and control of bodily passions.

When the passions have been utterly conquered and all karma has been removed, one becomes a Jina ("conqueror"), and is no longer subject to rebirth. Jainism conceives of a multi-layered universe containing both heavens and hells.

Movement through these levels of the universe requires adherence to the Jainism doctrines emphasizing a peaceful and disciplined life.

These principles include non-violence in all parts of life (verbal, physical, and mental), speaking truth, sexual monogamy, and the detachment from material things.

As part of the disciplined and non-violent lifestyle, Jains typically are strict vegetarians and often adhere to a quite arduous practice of non-violence, which restricts the sorts of occupations the may follow (no farming, for instance, since insects are inadvertently harmed in plowing).

Jainism's ethical system is based on the idea that right faith, knowledge, and conduct must be cultivated simultaneously.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1599 May 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
So Tacitus is talking about a religion, not a man?
So the historian is saying a religion was executed, put to death by Pontius Pilate.
By Procurator Pontius Pilate.

When in actual fact he was a Prefect.
Lincoln

United States

#1600 May 16, 2013
Science is silent on atheism!
Imhotep

Ocala, FL

#1601 May 16, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
Science is silent on atheism!
You are silent on knowledge

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1602 May 16, 2013
_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Bama.
Nice pic. 72, is that your age or IQ?
It's the.number that evokes fear.
Lincoln

United States

#1603 May 16, 2013
Preaching is to much avail, but practice is far more effective. A godly life is the strongest argument you can offer the skeptic.

Hosea Ballou
Imhotep

Ocala, FL

#1604 May 16, 2013
~~~\\\\|||
~~(@@)
~oOo--O--oOo
G.O.P. SPLIT OVER WHETHER TO WASTE TIME INVESTIGATING BENGHAZI OR REPEALING OBAMACARE

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—A deep divide has emerged within the Republican Party over whether to waste Congress’s time investigating Benghazi talking points or repealing Obamacare, G.O.P. lawmakers confirmed today.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Virginia), sounded the first discordant note at a press briefing this morning, telling reporters,“The time for wasting day after day investigating Benghazi is over. The American people are counting us to waste our time repealing Obamacare yet again.”

Warning that “the American people don’t have an endless appetite for meaningless political theater,” Cantor added,“If we’re going to do something that’s purely symbolic, pointless, and detached from reality, I say it should be repealing Obamacare for the thirtieth or fortieth time.”

Rep. Cantor’s comments drew a strong rebuke from Darrell Issa (R-California), who has spearheaded the investigation into Benghazi:“Quite frankly, we have all the time in the world to blow repealing Obamacare. The moment to waste our time investigating Benghazi is now.” Noting that previous attempts to repeal Obamacare had cost the taxpayers approximately fifty million dollars, Issa said,“I think we’re entitled to spend at least that much, if not more, investigating Benghazi again and again and again.”

But even as the debate raged over whether Obamacare or Benghazi was more worthy of Congress’ wasted time, House Speaker John Boehner offered a third point of view:“Personally, I think the time we’re wasting on Benghazi and Obamacare could be better spent blocking progress on guns and immigration.”
Thinking

London, UK

#1605 May 16, 2013
You're talking bollocks.
Lincoln wrote:
Science is silent on atheism!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#1606 May 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The ages have Aquinas and Aristotle.
On Topix, we have Polymouth and The Dude.
We are so blessed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Be7Og9Gc_KYXX
The ages also have Kant and Hume. We *know* that Aristotle and Aquinas were wrong about a great many things, especially their physics. This throws their whole theory of causality into doubt. Once you take into consideration that analyses of Kant and Hume, the classical notions of causality are simply untenable. If you go further and look at what modern physics has shown, even Kantian and Humean notions of causality are in trouble.

That's OK, being 800 years out of date is typical for those who reject science.

Since: Feb 13

Los Angeles, CA

#1607 May 16, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why were you citing Josephus as a credible historical source about Jesus?
Yes, in certain areas of history, Josephus is a credible source. In the area of Jesus...no.
-----

Hey! Hold on right there! I cited Josephus as a credible historical
source about Moses and the Exodus from Eghpt. As Jesus is concerned
I said that I would bet nothing about his existence. I said also that a man called Jesus might have existed but never the "Christ" of Paul.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1608 May 16, 2013
_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Bama.
Nice pic. 72, is that your age or IQ?
Neither: it is two numbers: 7, his mental age, and 2, his level of educational achievements.

There is some doubts that he actually made it to grade two...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1609 May 16, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Thus you have no more special acess to "TEH TRUTH" than anyone else does on the entire planet.(shrug)
Actually?

There is quite a bit of evidence, that he has much less access....

... just judging by his rather uneducated posts.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1610 May 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The ages also have Kant and Hume. We *know* that Aristotle and Aquinas were wrong about a great many things, especially their physics. This throws their whole theory of causality into doubt. Once you take into consideration that analyses of Kant and Hume, the classical notions of causality are simply untenable. If you go further and look at what modern physics has shown, even Kantian and Humean notions of causality are in trouble.
That's OK, being 800 years out of date is typical for those who reject science.
Being out of date, is also typical of someone who dropped out of school by 2nd grade...

... as in Buck's case--(the 2 in his picture)....

...(the 7 represents his emotional maturity level)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1611 May 16, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm fairly sure he would have been lying, HAD he actually claimed to have been around when Jesus was.
What, with being born around 20 years after the allegded zombie story took place that is.(shrug)
<quoted text>
Yes, he did discount the Christian the Christian narrative, as did most Romans at the time until a few centuries later when eventually Christianity became the dominant religion. Taking that into accout it is fair to say that he CANNOT be used to support the existence of Jesus any more than Josephus can.
You are an idiot.

Tacitus did not recount the christian narrative, and the christian narrative is not necessary to support the case that the man existed.

All that is relevant is that Tacitus recounted a man who led a cult called "christians" who were named after him being "christos" which meant "christ, and he was executed.

He also got the other characters right, before there were developed the present layers of mythology to support the story.

You don't care about evidence.

If you were intelligent, which you are not, you would have no trouble conceding the evidence for the person Jesus existing. And you would simply say that the mythology is what made him God, or the Son of God.

But no. You destroy your own position by making it impervious to this possibility, which is, coincidentally, the most likely possibility, given the evidence.

But again, evidence means nothing to you.

Because you are an idiot.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1612 May 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The ages also have Kant and Hume. We *know* that Aristotle and Aquinas were wrong about a great many things, especially their physics. This throws their whole theory of causality into doubt. Once you take into consideration that analyses of Kant and Hume, the classical notions of causality are simply untenable. If you go further and look at what modern physics has shown, even Kantian and Humean notions of causality are in trouble.
That's OK, being 800 years out of date is typical for those who reject science.
Wrong.

Aquinas and Aristotle's errors regarding physics say nothing about their analysis of causality.

And no, modern physics does not harm their analysis, at least to the extent that I have employed them.

Given everything presently known of physics, that which begins to exist requires a cause, and their is no requirement that cause temporally precede its effect.

That is true whether it comes from Aquinas, Kant, or Buck.

And it is true no matter what century it happens in.

As an aside, even with all modern knowledge in physics, a donut remains finite.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 min waaasssuuup 232,753
Islam is the Enemy (Sep '12) 1 hr Thinking 28
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 1 hr Thinking 119
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Thinking 23,178
God' existence 1 hr Thinking 57
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 1 hr Uncle Sam 2,264
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr thetruth 1,442
More from around the web