Religious Nonsense

Yeah, what about that? Trump seems an expert at that. Would you call him intellectual, rational, mature? Where did he get his morals and ethics?

Are you now intentionally misrepresenting my post? I never "pushed" or even hinted that blaming everyone else is an excuse for absolution. Is that your idea of an intellectual, rational, and mature discussion?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The least I ask for is that you address what I said, not what you gratuitously construct it to mean and then hang that on me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How about a theiometer, just to measure who is the more holy?

Comparing clothes at Sunday service is not a very accurate indicator.
Moreover, why pick Sunday to bother God with prayers and demands for his time?
It's His day off! A little rude don't you think?
He may have guests and be in the midst of throwing a BBQ and you were not invited!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Good point.
All atheiometer repair workshops would be required to have a properly functioning theiometer to callibrate faulty atheiometers.
While conducting such repairs, they would have to ensure they wore adequate protective clothing in case they got contaminated by working in the same environment as a theiometer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You have to figure out what leads to human well-being and what causes harm. How do you do it?

 

The Mirror Neural System (empathy) may be invaluable in determining the majority of those fundamental questions.
"Do not unto others as you would not have them do unto you".
The MNS will tell you what you would not like to have done unto you, thus what you should not do unto others. That would be a start.

 

Yep, a coverall, baseball cap and knee pads instead of a purple robe, golden mitre and a prayer book.

 

Fine.
Now we just have to contrive some means to inextricably tie that to atheistic rhetoric, and Robert will be your mother's brother!

 

This could be your eureka moment.
Fashion is as yet an untouched trope for atheism.

 

Well. I just did and it so happens my name is Robert and I am my mother's son.

 

If there is an inextricable (dare we say, "exclusive"?) connection between empathy and atheism, you didn't establish it.

 

Yes, but it isn't for theism. At least atheists don't waste money on pomp and circumstance to impart awe and obedience into the sheeple.

 

https://amp.dailydot.com/unclick/reddit-atheism-uganda-water-barrel-donation/

So when atheists break outside your definitions, are they false atheists or are your definitions false?

 

There is an inextricable common denominator in all healthy human and other mammalian brains, the Mirror Neural System. The point is that the MNS is NOT exclusive to humans only but can already be found in many species of mammals. It is the seat of learning how to respond to external sensory information.

It can have its drawbacks, if improperly trained. It is also the seat of emotion and can lead to some extreme emotional responses.
A dog's behavior is a reflection of it's master, a cruel master will either break a dog's spirit or make it totally unpredictable and dangerous..
A theist's behavior is a reflection of his theist master. If that master says that God commands one to kill heathens, the person so tasked will either become atheist (if he has ethical convictions), or become unpredictable and dangerous.

 

Humanitarian definitions are well established. I would never break them knowing that someone else may be injured by my actions.
Knowing what to do is sometimes problematic. Knowing what not to do is more clearly defined.

For that matter I think the list of "7 mortal sins" are one of the positive teachings in scripture.
But that is not because scripture has divine insight, it is an entirely reasonable secular concept, applicable to theists and atheist alike. "Common Sense"

 

If your argument is that atheists are not subject to an impetus of punishment/reward orchestrated by an authority to determine the behaviour of the said atheists, it becomes yet again a question of where the falsity lies when examples are brought to the contrary.

https://www.scholarships.com/financ...rships-by-type/agnostic-atheist-scholarships/

 

Whatever.
But my question still stands.
Where does the falsity lie?
In your definitions or in the perpetrators who claim as such?

 

Where does the falsity lie in theism? The question equally applies to theists, no?
Is secular law a recognition of rights and responsibilities for the "common good", or is it the word by the perpetrator who claims to have access to divine insight and orders action in the name of God.

And killed 3000 innocents, just to make a legal point or by divine right?

 

Sure.
As to where does this question lie in theism? In any scriptural commentary dealing with time, place and circumstance, which probably account for a vast majority of them.
IOW it's probably the no.1 topic that has been under discussion for thousands of years.

The secular recognition of rights are taken from transcendental literature.
The commonality of "common" good appears to be quite fluid over time, hence notions of using what Romans do in Rome, etc to determine principle from detail.

 

So you have never encountered a muslim who questioned bin Laden's claim to authority on the strength of scripture?

 

The question thus becomes if atheists would be unable to come to transcendental conclusions, without the aid of transcendental literature written by theist humans.
I believe the commonly accepted scientific term is "philosophy".

Ethics | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
https://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/

Morals are not the exclusive pervue of theists, much as they would like to claim that.
How many different transcendental scriptures and religions are there again?
Which of these scriptures can serve as a reliable guide for applied ethics?