Jesus is a spook

Hot

The greatest sin is tricking people to hold it as absolute belief

lol

Do you worship your God?

No...

I simply asked if you worshiped your god, I didn't ask you to strawman me

Yes, I have not argued that 'All of X people are brainwashed', where X people are people that have personal beliefs.

Without acknowledging what it is I was about to say

'I answered your question'

kek

I don't care if you follow the principles of Christianity, nor if you like the bible, but worshipping god is treating god as an absolute.

Yes, you can believe in a creator, worshipping a creator of which there is no evidence to point towards them or their need for worship I'd argue is brainwashed.

Expand.

I'd think It's synonymous with indoctrinated, where the indoctrination can be considered as lacking in verifiable fact.

'preventing the person from thinking clearly'

to impose belief in something where there is nothing to suggest belief or contrary is 'not thinking clearly'

Right

How about did you come across your faith?

I'd argue it's a statement considering there isn't evidence for the position

Why so?

Both

Assuming your definition

But I was referring to 'that's an opinion'

I retract brainwashed for indoctrinated or 'misguided'

What is the oxford dictionary definition for misguided

Correct

Does the imply subjectivity?

What's the definition of judgement

Is that the oxford dictionary conclusion?

'The ability to make considered decisions or come to sensible conclusions.'

The mass noun would be correct for usage, the example provided showcases this: '‘an error of judgement’

Right

Regardless, my case works in the case of 'reasoning'

Depends on what the terms can be extrapolated to mean

Yes but to the extent towards the right facts are deployed it can be stated that those who are worshipping gods are making an error of judgement as they believe that there is fact showcasing the existence of god when there isn't fact to show that this fact is linked to the existence of god.

And no

That's not how the burden of proof works

Which is why I never claim god doesn't exist

Why so?

Why do they lack this ability?

What makes it not worthwhile?

I claim it is misguided; 'an error of judgement' to assume that there are facts pointing towards the objective existence of god, worshipping is an act derived from belief in the conditioned existence of god, I question why people should be conditioned to such a belief?

I can't because I lack the evidence

not because I lack the ability

I have the tools to do so

In the same way you can't disprove the tooth fairy, but I suppose this is another opinion.

Well they have disproved the Abrahamic god's capacity for all-power, all-knowledge, all-mercy

I assume you're familiar with the 'god can't create a rock that he can't move'

Right

And the passive side is that we don't know and shouldn't take it as fact, so it isn't worthy of humouring

Otherwise we'd pray to every magical being ever, do every irrational thing ever.

So?

Should I disregard every 'traditional argument' because it regards X thing I believe to be greater than the rest of NOT X things?

Yes, I never claim to disprove god...

Don't try to weasle out big boi

I claim to argue that worshipping god is ubsurd

Yes, it can't be proven or empirically shown so why should it be humoured?

Then I suppose I'm of the opinion that all Christians are brainwashed and the tooth fairy is sucking my dick on Tuesday. Perhaps I can point towards the sins of christian society?

Then why do the same of any idea?

Why do the same for state socialists or even statism?

Okay..?

That doesn't answer my question

Why should you?

if you can't point towards what they've done wrong?

you can't do that, that'd be a waste of typing

'every society has sins'

Oh really? That's rich, but that's just your opinion right?

I suppose it's all just opinion in the end, it's not like we can logically derive our course of action from our goals and have them be objectively true for said set of goals? Nah just opinion.

**we can logically derive our course of action from our goals and have them be objectively true for said set of goals**

It's an objective way of attaining ones goals..

Logic is a way of constructing truth conserving statements

Then there are multiple solutions, yet the contrary cannot be the case

We can map solutions to efficiency, limit it down

we can map solutions dialectically to environment and people and limit it down

There are 'true' methods of reaching goals that ensure those goals are met given the assumptions hold.

So what does objective mean to you?

Based on A priori?

Then I suppose I've been conflating: Valid, Absolute and Objective.

So objective - not dependant on mind for existence; actual.

Absolute - based on the mind and yet cannot be showcased to not be the way it is without the mind

Valid - given a objective or mental assumption, a statement that holds validity

Sure, but I'd wish people to not hold ideas as absolutes. I suppose that means people that do so are misguided to me, but that may be my opinion. I wouldn't know unless there is objective evidence that can be gathered through studies, but then even the 'progress' of those studies depend on my goals and values of which are opinions.

Yup xD

Yh great talk 👍

Why are scientific debates of value?

Why should they not hurt others?

So god is an issue of the mind and not the physical world?

So god has no impact in the physical world?

So why value god?

why value Christianity?

Because it satisfies me to eliminate beliefs that I deem as irrational.

kek fair, but there are many contradictions in society beyond just the state

but that's going left side

👍

What makes the metaphysical worth discussion?