Is morality objective or subjective?

[Harbal]

So, you don't know what data there is, or how plausible it is, but you still insist "there's obviously enough" of it?

Correct. My trust in science is based on its track record.

Apparently not. Apparently, your faith is based on the hope that science has data you've never heard of, and the quality of which you don't know, if they have it.

I neither have faith nor hope in science. Science has been remarkably successful at discovering how the world works, so I have a certain amount of confidence in it, but that's not the same thing as faith. And what do you imagine I am hoping for? If science says the universe started with the Big Bang, I say, "okay, that's interesting", and if it then changes it's mind and says, no, we got it wrong, I would say, "fair enough, so what do you think now, then?" I really don't have any preference for how the universe came into existence, why should I have? Science is always searching for truth, whereas you found God and stopped looking.

Okay, give us some scientific data that shows God created everything, or even that he exists.

I've been doing that on the other threads you've been following. So why do it here?

I can't remember seeing anything that resembled scientific support for God, but if I did see it, I can only assume I recognised it for what it was.

It's nothing to do with science, really. The bottom line is; I don't believe in mythical creatures.

Ah. There's the truth of the matter.

Well, thanks for at least being frank about that.

I would never be anything else, but then I am not wedded to any beliefs that require me to be anything else.

[Immanuel Can]

I would wonder why on earth would someone bury a strand of gold in a pile of straw.

And yet, you get the point. The worth of something is not defined by the amount of "stuff" that may be around it.

[Immanuel Can]

Science has been remarkably successful at discovering how the world works, so I have a certain amount of confidence in it, but that's not the same thing as faith.

Sometimes, that's all it is. And in such cases, it's not really about science, but about a belief system called "Scientism," which is the naive belief that science is the universal key to knowledge of everything.

But there's a second problem, one which, as I said, the COVID crisis highlights: that not everybody who claims to have "science" on their side actually does. In fact, quite a lot of people will claim to have a backing from "science" for a whole lot of things that real sciences has neither promised nor certified.

Okay, give us some scientific data that shows God created everything, or even that he exists.

I've been doing that on the other threads you've been following. So why do it here?

I can't remember seeing anything that resembled scientific support for God, but if I did see it, I can only assume I recognised it for what it was.

Assumptions are free.

[attofishpi]

The only time God can be objective about morality, is when God considers the path in life that the subject for consideration of said morality has been evaluated.

In other words, God needs to comprehend the PATH of any individual - ME_PATH_Y - EMPATHY.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Sometimes, that's all it is. And in such cases, it's not really about science, but about a belief system called "Scientism," which is the naive belief that science is the universal key to knowledge of everything.

How come you are not critical of that 'ism' that is similar to the immature thinking of 'scientism', i.e.
'theism' which is the naive belief that the omniscient-God-driven-theology is the universal key to knowledge of everything?

[Harbal]

Science has been remarkably successful at discovering how the world works, so I have a certain amount of confidence in it, but that's not the same thing as faith.

Sometimes, that's all it is. And in such cases, it's not really about science, but about a belief system called "Scientism," which is the naive belief that science is the universal key to knowledge of everything.

Science is the only key to knowledge if we want to know the origins of our universe, it's as simple as that.

I can't remember seeing anything that resembled scientific support for God, but if I did see it, I can only assume I recognised it for what it was.

Assumptions are free.

So are false claims.

I would wonder why on earth would someone bury a strand of gold in a pile of straw.

And yet, you get the point. The worth of something is not defined by the amount of "stuff" that may be around it.

No, I don't get it, I am still looking for the point of burying a tiny piece of valuable stuff in an unimaginably immense pile of ordinary stuff. What's the reason for that, according to Bibleism?

[attofishpi]

Science is the only key to knowledge if we want to know the origins of our universe, it's as simple as that.

How certain R U on that claim Harbal?

I agree that science is a 'key' to knowledge of the Universe. But...what if it is not as "simple as that".

THAT.

To comprehend THE actual "key" ...indeed to KNOW there is an intelligence behind what we perceive of reality...is to comprehend its requirement of belief?

[Harbal]

Science is the only key to knowledge if we want to know the origins of our universe, it's as simple as that.

How certain R U on that claim Harbal?

I agree that science is a 'key' to knowledge of the Universe. But...what if it is not as "simple as that".

Without knowing why it's not as simple as that, I can't say.

To comprehend THE actual "key" ...indeed to KNOW there is an intelligence behind what we perceive of reality...is to comprehend its requirement of belief?

Maybe there is some sort of intelligence behind what we perceive as reality; I have never discounted that possibility, but we won't learn anything about it from the Bible if there is.

[attofishpi]

Maybe there is some sort of intelligence behind what we perceive as reality; I have never discounted that possibility, but we won't learn anything about it from the Bible if there is.

..how so? Within the Bible is a binary request for such a matter.

..and we all know what matter is...very powerful E=MC2

[Harbal]

Maybe there is some sort of intelligence behind what we perceive as reality; I have never discounted that possibility, but we won't learn anything about it from the Bible if there is.

..how so? Within the Bible is a binary request for such a matter.

I don't know what you mean. The Bible is just an arbitrary collection of ancient stories written by people whose only way of explaining anything was to make something up.

[attofishpi]

Maybe there is some sort of intelligence behind what we perceive as reality; I have never discounted that possibility, but we won't learn anything about it from the Bible if there is.

..how so? Within the Bible is a binary request for such a matter.

I don't know what you mean. The Bible is just an arbitrary collection of ancient stories written by people whose only way of explaining anything was to make something up.

..BINARILY as I stated. Therefore, I mean if you believe then you will understand that there is more knowledge afforded to U.

Do U understand that to believe in the life of Christ is a binary matter?

[Harbal]

..how so? Within the Bible is a binary request for such a matter.

I don't know what you mean. The Bible is just an arbitrary collection of ancient stories written by people whose only way of explaining anything was to make something up.

..BINARILY as I stated. Therefore, I mean if you believe then you will understand that there is more knowledge afforded to U.

Do U understand that to believe in the life of Christ is a binary matter?

No, I don't understand. Can't you explain in ordinary language?

[attofishpi]

I don't know what you mean. The Bible is just an arbitrary collection of ancient stories written by people whose only way of explaining anything was to make something up.

..BINARILY as I stated. Therefore, I mean if you believe then you will understand that there is more knowledge afforded to U.

Do U understand that to believe in the life of Christ is a binary matter?

No, I don't understand. Can't you explain in ordinary language?

Sure. A binary question requires an answer of YES or NO. etc..

So what I propose to you is that belief in the life of Christ is also a binary question: To believe Y or not to believe N.

(to be honest, I could not give a flying fuck weather you believe ) ..I think I just find the forum a form of entertainment at best.

[Harbal]

..BINARILY as I stated. Therefore, I mean if you believe then you will understand that there is more knowledge afforded to U.

Do U understand that to believe in the life of Christ is a binary matter?

No, I don't understand. Can't you explain in ordinary language?

Sure. A binary question requires an answer of YES or NO. etc..

So what I propose to you is that belief in the life of Christ is also a binary question: To believe Y or not to believe N.

(to be honest, I could not give a flying fuck weather you believe ) ..I think I just find the forum a form of entertainment at best.

I neither believe nor disbelieve that there was an actual man called Jesus on whom the New Testament was based. I don't know, and I don't give one of those flying things about whether there was or wasn't.

[attofishpi]

No, I don't understand. Can't you explain in ordinary language?

Sure. A binary question requires an answer of YES or NO. etc..

So what I propose to you is that belief in the life of Christ is also a binary question: To believe Y or not to believe N.

(to be honest, I could not give a flying fuck weather you believe ) ..I think I just find the forum a form of entertainment at best.

I neither believe nor disbelieve that there was an actual man called Jesus on whom the New Testament was based. I don't know, and I don't give one of those flying things about whether there was or wasn't.

Yes you do Harbal. You have made it very clear that you don't believe in the life of Jesus the Christ.