The Faith & Religion mega Thread

ok, my last off topic post:

The alternative requires thousands of them, most of them Americans plotting against their own people. There's no way that gets kept quiet.

Manhattan project.
Pearl Harbor.

We kept those quiet. Manhattan project is proven beyond any shadow of a doubt. and the FOIA'd the dirt on Pearl Harbor, then reneged the FIOA. Pearl Harbor was not exactly an 'inside job' but it has been proven that we knew about it beforehand and let it happen.

Determinism and Fatalism can never be proved wrong, mostly because they are not falsifiable ... i.e. no test can be done which can prove them wrong. They are right no matter what, because no matter what happens it is predetermined.

The only way to argue against this is in terms of attitude. Let's say that you are right, and everything is predetermined, and anything and everything you do has absolutely no impact on the future. I, for one, would never accept this and continue to fight for what is right. You, on the other hand, would just accept.

P.S. I know that in some threads I have said fatalist things, like that there is no hope, and Sauron will rule middle-earth. However, even tho I am technically a fatalist, I continue to fight against this force, even if I know I will almost certainly lose. It's kinda like in the Matrix, where Agent Smith keeps saying his motto: "It is inevitable Mr. Anderson".

The problem may also be one of certainty. Are you really 100 % sure that everything is predetermined or are you only 99.9999....% sure ?

Another argument might be randomness. How can randomness exist if everything is predetermined ?

Fatalism may strike all of us one day, but I say that it must be fought against, lest we all become slaves to the ones who are not fatalists.

Originally Posted by linuxpokernut ok, my last off topic post:

I'm not sure it's really off-topic, because the same woolly thinking that informs religion also informs conspiracy theories (the bad kind).

Originally Posted by linuxpokernut Manhattan project. Pearl Harbor. We kept those quiet. Manhattan project is proven beyond any shadow of a doubt. and the FOIA'd the dirt on Pearl Harbor, then reneged the FIOA. Pearl Harbor was not exactly an 'inside job' but it has been proven that we knew about it beforehand and let it happen.

Manhattan Project merely proves my point... this was a scenario in which a big conspiracy was being kept because keeping the secret protected America. 9/11 was exactly the opposite. Whenever we've had conspiracies that harmed America, the secrets came out fairly quickly. See: Bay of Pigs, Iran-Contra, etc.

Pearl Harbor is another one of those "bad kind" of conspiracy theories. There were signs that were ignored out of hubris, not out of deliberate calculation. If the purpose of allowing Pearl Harbor to happen was to incite the American people to war, they could have allowed it to come, and had an appropriate response waiting for Japan when they arrived. No military planner would EVER agree to allowing the backbone of the Pacific Fleet to be decimated as a precursor to a war you'd need the Pacific Fleet to fight.

Come on now, conspiracies are surely off-topic.

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H Another argument might be randomness. How can randomness exist if everything is predetermined ?

Indeed; how do we know that it isn't chaos (which is still deterministic), not randomness? How do we even define "randomness"? Is it just a lack of predictability? Nope…chaos can be quite difficult to predict. Is it a lack of causal relation between two events? Well…how could such a thing even exist in this universe? We perceive causality on a constant basis (you could argue that this is an artifact of our perception, but to do so is to state that everything, not just free will, is an illusion), so how could anything exist which doesn't follow along with it? (…or if it could, then how would we be able to know about it?)

Anyways, my "enthusiasm" (if you want to call it that) on the topic has started dropping…I don't think I'll be arguing any further.

Radioactive decay is the best source for truly random data:
https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/secure_generate.html

ShaanAli, you have asserted repeatedly that the Koran was dictated by God to Mohammed. I managed to miss the posts where you (supposedly) gave evidence for this, and I'm not going to search through the whole thread for it. So can you remind me again why I should consider this idea to be true?

If I recall correctly, your "proof" is that there are currently x number of Muslims in the world and that the religion is currently x number of years old. Did you have something more a) convincing and b) logically connected to the conclusion?

WOW!
this thread is almost 4 years old
other than M$ and windbloz ranting I doubt that any other subject has been on this forum for so long

Originally Posted by ShaanAli In other words you mean to say here, priests of temples also dont know their scriptures? There is no one in society to raise this as a concern and give scheduled cast their right?

For the nth time I am telling you, that this thread is about
-G-O-D- and -HO-L-Y-B-O-O-K-S-, ONLY.
You can discuss the acts of mere mortals with someone else,
I am NOT interested. Thank you for understanding.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Hinduism has divided the God based on Cast, Region, Race, Work etc etc....

I give a damn to how mere mortals have distorted the religion for their
own benefits. As long as, Lord Krishna and Lord Ram, have ZERO problems
with schedule castes, and Lord Krishna keeps talking sense in Baghwad Gita,
I don't care what other mere mortals think and do.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Religious books are not just meant to be read and keep in corner. They should be in practice.

Great advice, and whom was this directed to and why?

Originally Posted by ShaanAli The biggest Hinduism problem is they are very far from original scripts.

I read this as the Hindu "people" are far from original scripts...
Fine! Read the first sentence I wrote in this post.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli If you would be asking this (or similar) question to me from Quran, your next line would be nothing but insulting the God.

This is a personal attack. Have I anywhere "insulted" your god in past posts?
If yes, quote them here.
If no, take back your claim.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli I never intend to hurt anyone.

Go and fool someone else.
You were the one talking about "stories" in other's religions, even when
the other person (whom you were referring to) had NOT "claimed" anything
about their God. Remember something?

Originally Posted by MrCode Indeed; how do we know that it isn't chaos (which is still deterministic), not randomness? How do we even define "randomness"? Is it just a lack of predictability? Nope…chaos can be quite difficult to predict. Is it a lack of causal relation between two events? Well…how could such a thing even exist in this universe? We perceive causality on a constant basis (you could argue that this is an artifact of our perception, but to do so is to state that everything, not just free will, is an illusion), so how could anything exist which doesn't follow along with it? (…or if it could, then how would we be able to know about it?) Anyways, my "enthusiasm" (if you want to call it that) on the topic has started dropping…I don't think I'll be arguing any further.

True randomness appears to exist in quantum physics, and indeed is finding practical applications.

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H Radioactive decay is the best source for truly random data: https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/secure_generate.html

is this is the address you meant to post http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/

Originally Posted by SigTerm (IMO) When something unexplainable happens, it doesn't mean a god is responsible.

Indeed, but as you know, ignorance is bliss. Believers don't know that why
did this happen, so they tend to think that may be some supreme power is
responsible for the same.

One way can be to keep on studying science and doing research, until and
unless one discovers that each and everything existing in the universe is
can be proven through science or there is at least one thing that science
doesn't have answer for. But, for this act, one may require a very huge
amount of time, may be his full life, to get to a solution (if any).

Even if he gets to some solution in the end, he would have missed all the
fun in his life, in searching the solution. And IMO, anything which gives
you courage to deal with hardships of life, keeps your mind calm, should
be accepted for yourself.

Originally Posted by SigTerm ...IMO, "you got lucky" pretty much explains it.

A believer would say, God made me lucky, for the reasons mentioned above.

Originally Posted by SigTerm Well, in this case there's no problem in trying to destroy/banish it, right?

Indeed, but answer to this question would make more sense, if you ask this
to someone who's religion permits a master-slave kind of relationship.

Originally Posted by SigTerm Religion is inherited from parents. I still remember a christian that tried to brainwash me when I was a kid. (IMO) people should decide for themselves when they grow up.

Indeed. 7 years back, I asked my father if he has any problems if I quit
<myReligion>, to which he replied, why should I have any problems, its your
life, and if you don't believe in our God then there is no point in wasting
your time in prayers.

Originally Posted by SigTerm Even if a god exists, why do you think that a feeling of danger can only originate directly from the god? God is meant to be a highest instance in entire universe, after all.

Not understood the point in question.

Originally Posted by SigTerm If a god can die, then there can be a holy book without a god.

That is a generic statement. Not all religions have a God which can die.
In some religions, god is supposed to be immortal.

Originally Posted by dugan ShaanAli, you have asserted repeatedly that the Koran was dictated by God to Mohammed. I managed to miss the posts where you (supposedly) gave evidence for this, and I'm not going to search through the whole thread for it. So can you remind me again why I should consider this idea to be true?

Well, indeed, senior members too, do have a right to troll once a while, but IMO beating flogging a dead horse isn't too exciting.

It's "flogging a dead horse", Ani.

Originally Posted by brianL It's "flogging a dead horse", Ani.

Thanks Guru ji.