For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Many who agree with you are flocking to Syria and Iraq in their droves even as we speak to book themselves a front seat, Fishy.attofishpi wrote:I think from a theist perspective, one must ultimately think upon one's actions here in this life that could affect where one ends up in one's next life.
I know, and when i asked the sage\God whether these lads that enjoy chopping heads off are to be turned into the beast, i got the reply - three heavy taps on my right shoulder - 'right.'Obvious Leo wrote:Many who agree with you are flocking to Syria and Iraq in their droves even as we speak to book themselves a front seat, Fishy.attofishpi wrote:I think from a theist perspective, one must ultimately think upon one's actions here in this life that could affect where one ends up in one's next life.
Aint wishing for anything mate. Just the nature of God...sorting out who has the right to me a man, and who is to become the energy of man - entropy's a p**** of a thing.Obvious Leo wrote:You should be careful what you wish for mate. You might draw the short straw and finish up sharing your afterlife with a bloke wielding a machete. Eternal life might not be such a bargain after all.
Mmm, almost. More like, best not make an enemy of such an entity.Obvious Leo wrote:Good point. With a friend like god who the hell needs enemies?
Okay..yes...thanks. I am beginning to believe that maybe my communication problem begins with my bad habit/sloppy thinking when it comes to how I use words.marjoram_blues wrote: I don't think it is 'rubbish' that you cope with the words of God in your head. I agree that it is difficult to change an ingrained way of thinking. My concern is that it is made more difficult if we continue to use the words and concepts of any indoctrination that we wish to leave. Like 'sin' and 'heaven' and 'hell'.
Well then, I have no clue what you are trying to say...perhaps there is someone out there who understands enough to translate?marjoram_blues wrote:AS - I'm done here. Really, it's not about your alleged communication problems. Or using the word 'thingy'...
No, the English is clear enough or rather "damn" straight!artisticsolution wrote:Well then, I have no clue what you are trying to say...perhaps there is someone out there who understands enough to translate?marjoram_blues wrote:AS - I'm done here. Really, it's not about your alleged communication problems. Or using the word 'thingy'...
If you haven't been following our discussion, then I don't know that anyone else has - or even cares...artisticsolution wrote:Well then, I have no clue what you are trying to say...perhaps there is someone out there who understands enough to translate?marjoram_blues wrote:AS - I'm done here. Really, it's not about your alleged communication problems. Or using the word 'thingy'...
Yes. It's an integral part of the belief system it seems.attofishpi wrote: I think from a theist perspective, one must ultimately think upon one's actions here in this life that could affect where one ends up in one's next life.
How could THEY know what? By 'they', I am thinking you mean atheists.marjoram_blues wrote:
You wrote that you are coming from a Christian perspective because you are aware that atheists don't have the same running commentary in their heads as you have been indoctrinated/trained to think. So, how could they know?
As to 'the quiet contemplation of what God would think...' Fair enough. Except Judgement Day is a lifetime too late. People are held accountable now - in the real world. That is why I asked the questions re your 'personal accountability'. Also, what you meant by 'sin' - not your sin but the concept of 'sin'.
Where did I say that personal views can't be discussed within a secular framework? I said they can...but not if we want to stay on topic of this thread.Finally, I disagree with your opinion that your thread topic, related points and personal views can't be discussed within a secular framework.
That is the whole point of philosophy.
It doesn't matter if my thesis is true or false...that isn't the debate I wanted to get into...as it's been hashed out to death already! I wanted to make a claim, that IF the word of God is TRUE, Then...blah blah blah....using the scriptures to back up claims.
First, philosophy is not an easy subject. In fact, it is rather difficult. This is true even for introductory courses. You will have to apply yourself to a degree matched only in science or mathematics courses. Despite rumors to the contrary, reading and writing about philosophy is not like reading and writing about novels or poems or the movies. Nor is writing philosophy an expression of one’s feelings or ideas about life. Philosophy consists of a series of problems and investigations into those problems. One attempts to solve each problem by making claims which purport to be true, and by backing those claims with arguments.
I am easily distracted...that is why i wanted to stay on topic...so I would not let my feelings get in the way of 'backing my claim with arguments.'First, philosophy is not an easy subject. In fact, it is rather difficult. This is true even for introductory courses. You will have to apply yourself to a degree matched only in science or mathematics courses. Despite rumors to the contrary, reading and writing about philosophy is not like reading and writing about novels or poems or the movies. Nor is writing philosophy an expression of one’s feelings or ideas about life. Philosophy consists of a series of problems and investigations into those problems. One attempts to solve each problem by making claims which purport to be true, and by backing those claims with arguments.
I have been trying to have a philosophical debate with you IC...as we are in a philosophy forum. I was trying to do this (below in quotes)....I hope we can do this together as well as with others who want to attempt to 'do' philosophy , instead of merely citing opinion. If we come from the place that the Bible is the word of God , regarding the scriptures, then maybe we can stay on topic. I want to come from that angle as a axiom, if it is okay with you?Immanuel Can wrote:Ah, but the question is not "Can Atheists be good?" for the answer to that is, as you say, very obvious: they can certainly choose to be if they wish, just as we all can. And it's certainly not premised on any assumption that Atheists can only be bad people. That would be unreasonable, obviously. Nor is the question, "Do Atheists have any moral compass?" for Christians already assert that they do -- that God has put within every person some knowledge of objective right and wrong...so that doesn't even become a contentious issue for either side.Lacewing wrote:So why would it matter at all if a person was an atheist? If someone tries to say that atheists don't have a moral compass, that's just ignorance -- and perhaps an attempt to insist on the necessity of belief in a god, and therefore validating ones own "rightness" for doing so?
The real question is "Why do they HAVE to be good?" That is, what moral compulsion does any morality have, given any worldview premised on Atheism.
Thanks for your starting point. It's a helpful place to begin, and it lets us explain the central question properly.
Quoted from this article by Wayne Buck, in philosophy Now:Philosophy articles and books cannot be read as you read a novel or a newspaper article. You have to study each book or article, re-reading it several times. You must dissect its contents using your own unique intelligence, and then put it back together in a way that gives you personally a clear and distinct understanding of its arguments. The author must be interrogated – forced to admit to the hidden assumptions in his arguments and the flaws of his reasoning. At the same time, you should bend over backwards to give him the benefit of the doubt, to see your objections as potential misunderstandings of what he means. If you find a mistake in the argument, you must do your best to patch it up for the author and make his case as strong as possible – especially if you disagree with the argument. For only if you can imagine how the author would respond to your criticism can you be assured of not misunderstanding him or of not overlooking a point in his favor. So reading a philosophy text is an activity. Make outlines, mark up the page with comments and questions and doubts, read from the middle, from the end – from the beginning, even – and discuss it with your classmates or philosophically-minded friends.