A religion question for Robroy,but will he give me a straigh

Sploom:
1 timothy 4,3to5
This verse tells how the Roman church will tell you not to get married.So we have monks,nuns preists cant enjoy the gift of ■■■ that God gave us to enjoy,and lets fave it,is nit marriage the best thing this life offers? I think it is.Two people devoted to each other,enjoying intimacy,helping each other through the difficulties that life presents.And then the gift of children too,the joy of parenthood and when se are old and infirm,there is someone that gives a [zb].
How evil a thing to try and deprive others of this wonderful gift and yet people tar us all with the same brush .Just because the pope says you(nuns) cant marry,we(Christians) are accused of forcing others to abstein from these gifts.Now this dies get on my nerves I must admit.

Apart from the “boot-strapping” argument (flaw) there is the point made by Dawkins in one of his books: summat about experts arguing over the colours of pixie wings? When pixies don`t exist?

If only the bible mentioned this.

Maybe not pixies?
Maybe angels, and maybe not wing colour?
Maybe how many can dance on the head of a pin?

Oh,Dawkins,the guy who makes it his purpose in life to prove that life has no purpose,lol.
:unamused:

Sploom:
,I was brought up in the Roman church,a religion I now see as false,like all other religions

Do you not see the irony there ^^^?

Sploom:
Oh,Dawkins,the guy who makes it his purpose in life to prove that life has no purpose,lol.
:unamused:

And?
Life is what YOU make it?

Or
are we dealing with a determinative Universe?
ie The machine has been wound up and we are all merely following pre-arranged paths?

Or
do we have free will, so that we choose our paths?

Or
there was an initial (God-like) impulse that sets us off?

In the first case, God has already decided whether or not we enter any heaven.
In the second and third cases it seems we have a non-interventionist God, so she ain`t gonna step in and decide where “we*” go after death.

  • Of course, no one here has attempted to state who “we”…? “are” nor “who”/“what” “god” “is” yet…

Golly, gosh, no-one here has defined which alphabet is in use, but you`re all trying to spell comperker…complickat…diffacul…hard…words.

Franglais:

Apart from the “boot-strapping” argument (flaw) there is the point made by Dawkins in one of his books: summat about experts arguing over the colours of pixie wings? When pixies don`t exist?

Maybe how many can dance on the head of a pin?

IIRC It’s how many angels can dance on the head of a pin - to which I’d say, as many as you like, they’re all imaginary so they could be the size of a quark.

Sploom:
Oh,Dawkins,the guy who makes it his purpose in life to prove that life has no purpose,lol.
:unamused:

He’s a miserable git lacking in a sense of humour for sure, but at least he’s rational :wink:

the maoster:

Sploom:
,I was brought up in the Roman church,a religion I now see as false,like all other religions

Do you not see the irony there ^^^?

■■■■! You beat me to it, I was going to tell Sploom “You had me at false…” :laughing:

Here’s Sploom on a particularly passionate day of evangelizing :laughing:
youtu.be/hmyuE0NpNgE

Here’s why Sploom doesn’t holiday in Scotland :wink: (spoiler prevention alert, if you haven’t yet seen The Wicker Man (1973), don’t watch this clip)
youtu.be/Bzpmkm4F6eQ

Sploom:
Oh,Dawkins,the guy who makes it his purpose in life to prove that life has no purpose,lol.

Purpose?
Self fulfillment?
“My name is Franglais, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
or Roy? (NO! not you)
youtube.com/watch?v=NoAzpa1x7jU

Zac_A:
Here’s Sploom on a particularly passionate day of evangelizing :laughing:
youtu.be/hmyuE0NpNgE

Here’s why Sploom doesn’t holiday in Scotland :wink: (spoiler prevention alert, if you haven’t yet seen The Wicker Man (1973), don’t watch this clip)
youtu.be/Bzpmkm4F6eQ

Huh…no Britt Ekland

Franglais.
If you are an atheist,you live in a derterminative universe.Free will is a supernatiral gift.

Sploom:
Franglais.
If you are an atheist,you live in a derterminative universe.Free will is a supernatiral gift.

How so?
To make a contentious statement, such as “we live in a determinative universe” is unacceptable, without first determinating the truth of such!
As I said before, that is a “boot-strapping” argument. A circular argument.
Ummm “built on sand”…

Free will, is probably there.
If it isn`t then God is a nasty ■■■■■■■ for giving birth to infants who will die painful deaths before they achieve proper understanding of good/evil.

More than that we possibly/probably live in a quantum universe…
Not only do we have free will, but that free will is not going to follow any set path.

Random events are inevitable…
That is not saying merely that we aren`t clever enough to predict them, but is saying they are totally unpredictable.
I think the auto-censor will kick in here so:
STUF HAPPENS ! Get used to it.

Dont go looking for explanations etc. You will find them if you do, of course you will. But they wont be real.

Be nice for it`s own sake. Today.
Not for a reward later on.

But how can something obeying the laws of physics have free will?
Random,yes,but even throwing a dice isnt completley random then.

Franglais:

robroy:
I suppose I’d better shape up

If you need a man?

I guess so. :smiley:

Please don’t “Meditate on my erection” as your next logical step…
Me not being available for such anti-hetro behaviour and all. :stuck_out_tongue:

Sploom:
But how can something obeying the laws of physics have free will?
Random,yes,but even throwing a dice isnt completley random then.

Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Matthew 4:5-7

If you DO throw yourself off a cliff then, it will be because you wish to kill yourself, rather than perform a “Leap of Faith”. The number of suicides at places like Beachy Head should be sufficient evidence that “VIcars - don’t go there to be tempted/tested”. People go there to “End it all” - full stop.

If you don’t understand Gravity, or other laws of physics - then does that mean you are more likely to be killed by it?
YES! - You only have to follow a tipper drivers, and other “9 points OK” types a few miles to realize that the chump all-too-often doesn’t even understand basic physics concepts such as:

(1) “Center of Gravity” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrPy7PEq7Ig

(2) “Potential Energy” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUo-6AMJwME

(3) “Takeoff Velocity and Stall Speeds” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTk_kPeA63c

To go back to the point above regarding “Randomness”:

If you stand to gain or lose nothing in particular from a 50/50 situation going either way, then 100 coin flips will give something exactly, or very close to 50 results each way.

If you stood to lose your life if it comes up “heads” more often than “Tails”, then someone “lucky in life-and-limb” will suddenly see their “GOOD” luck manifest itself by scoring 60/40 and better in their favour, when life and limb is at stake.

If you stood to gain financially however, then you’ll then find that it’ll be 60/40 in this example AGAINST you.

“Cluster Luck”.

People who are already lost - don’t need anything above and beyond the law of averages ever happening to them, which re-enforces any belief they have in the nothingness of existance, and the total goneness of the death at the end of such an spiritually empty life.

People that are “half-heartedly” religious - need a nudge or two in the wrong direction to “bring them back down to earth”.
Such people will find themselves being unlucky in just about everything in life, and further misfortune is more likely to make such a person believe against God, rather than do the more logical thing and Blame Satan for the day-to-day misfortunes that plague all of us, both in seen and unseen ways.

People that are “Devoutly Religious” cannot be shaken off their faith by “misfortunes”, BUT can be made a spectacular example of - by coming to grief in a very public and nasty, horrible way.
"Look at what happened to the Devout Christian - Hah! If there WAS a God - do you think he would let that happen to them? Or maybe God was punishing them for not being holier-than-thou enough! Hah! "

Seemingly few people - see it as a Devil’s Strategem where by bringing down someone who “doesn’t deserve that” - OTHERS looking on will lose faith, or at least fail to acquire faith from the example rolled out before them.

An Example might be say, Christopher Reeve, Devout Christian, breaks his neck in riding accident, paralyzed in an iron lung, dies prematurely due to complications from his past injury, wife dies soon after from Lung Cancer - no one apparently saved from the “onlookers” point of view…

It is very easy to have “no faith at all” IF everything in life goes according to the law of averages, where we might proberbally throw a double six occasionally, but will never have such an unlikely event happen to us “three times in quick succession” - Right?

If you are unlucky Three times in quick succession, then you might question if you should consider “changing your lifestyle” in some way…
If you are lucky three times in quick succession on the other hand, then personally - I would be looking over my shoulder, not taking third lights, or doing anything else that “rocks the boat” at a time I can’t help feeling vulnerable…

I get angry when things go wrong multiple times in quick succession, clearly a bit above and beyond the law of averages… My anger gets directed at Satan though, rather than God “For not stopping it…”
I get nervous - when things go right. I wonder if God is trying to tell me something life-changing that I need to do, and soon - and I look around for some signs and clues as to what that might be, should no “dreams” be forthcoming, nor messangers contact me directly.

The rest of the time? - I just get on with my life, like everyone else does…
For many people “The rest of the time” - is 100% of their lives, and the inertia is too much to overcome to obtain or lose faith as time goes on.
The time to gain or lose faith - is whilst you are still in academia imo. You’re in a “Mode to Learn” that slips away once one passes the age of 30 I reckon…

What man’s created
Man can destroy
Bring to light
That day of joy

Wow,I did read your post but couldnt follow everything.but about randomness,I think you would be surprised if you rolled a coin 100 times how far from 50 to 50 it could be.
I remember once,I went to the crucible to watch the snooker and they had this roulette wheel just to play for fun.I started off with a couple of hundred “pounds” and eventually won 60k.Why cant that happen for real! Very annoying.

Sploom:
Wow,I did read your post but couldnt follow everything.but about randomness,I think you would be surprised if you rolled a coin 100 times how far from 50 to 50 it could be.
I remember once,I went to the crucible to watch the snooker and they had this roulette wheel just to play for fun.I started off with a couple of hundred “pounds” and eventually won 60k.Why cant that happen for real! Very annoying.

I did mention in the post above that “Luck” tends to be “Better than average” if you stand to be better off Life-and Limb wise, but always below average if you stand to gain from it financially…
If you’d been playing said “Roulette Wheel” for real money, then the chances of getting a number straight-up are one-in 37, or around 3% IF you bet, say £1.
If you bet a week’s wages on that - the “luck” reduces by around half as much again, meaning you’ll only get your number come up once in around 50 spins, which of course means that you won’t come up on top - if you literally did away your wages at the same establishment every week for a year.

Bookmakers - rely on people’s luck being at it’s worst - when they are over-staking, of course.

If people were lucky “according to the law of averages” - then just think: You could bet £1 36 goes in a row, and should you lose those 36 times - you’d lump every penny you had on for spin 37… Right?

The “Gambler’s Phallacy” is supposed to be that “The roulette wheel - doesn’t know or remember what it’s last spin was, so the chances of a single number coming up on the NEXT spin - remain at 1 in 37 (UK wheel) indefinitely…”
But in Galileo fashion - I would argue… “Yet there is clusterluck, where the same number occasionally comes up multiple times in quick succession”…
If a gambler found a codex for predicting that in advance - then Casinos would be in big trouble indeed.
On American wheels - the addition of the 00 bed adds that “luck reduction” for REAL, meaning it is a mug’s game indeed IF you must be playing roulette - to ever play on one in say, Las Vegas.
There are even players who “bet on the last number that comes in” - consistently, in which case they will automatically get the “clusterluck” should it ever happen… BUT I’m told that “changing your stake” all over the place, and even betting “any kind of system” is considered as CHEATING in many casinos, especially in the US, where there’s no such think as a “Layer” of risk - only an accountant of the laws of average!

Another system such as “doubling your stake if you lose” - doesn’t work neither, as you’d have enough cash for about 8-10 spins, which is nowhere near enough to get a straight-up number, on roulette at least.
Betting the EVENS things - is even worse, as the attrition works against you much more slowly, meaning you need a lot more spins to go your way than a mere “3 out of the next 5 spins” to come out decently ahead…

In Ireland, it used to be normal to see Nuns and Dog Collars present at Racetracks.
Theologically, I could suggest that “As Catholic clergy have taken a vow of poverty - what better place to achieve that?” - than at a racetrack? :stuck_out_tongue: :open_mouth:

Roman soldiers - cast lots to decide who should acquire the “Robe” shed by Christ just before he was crucified.

“Is Gambling Immoral?” is a question that has plagued thinkers for centuries.

I would say "If you leave loved ones short as a consequence of OVER-Gambling - then YES. It is as immoral as being a Drunk. Not everyone who consumes alcohol - is a drunk though, far from it.

Medical Science suggests that a very SMALL amount of alcohol inbibed on a regular basis - is better for you than “no alcohol consumption at all”.
This would support the Roman Catholic notion: “Everything in moderation” and the fact that Mediterranean Catholics - drink wine at so many meals, including the younger family members sitting at table…

Should you stop someone “Throwing their money away on an obviously bent-gambling method?”
Should you stop someone voting when you know the vote will be discarded if it is for a non-deep state approved challenger?
Dunno. Make up your own minds. It’s that or “Rise Up” I suggest.
If elections were allowed to do what they are supposed do do, unmolested - the world would be a much fairer, and happier place.
If Religions got better press - there might be more converts to it as well.
Alas, people tend to be “Brought up” in a religion, and once they lose that faith - never take another on the whole.
The “door to heaven” thus - is firmly closed behind you. There’s no need to make it “For all eternity!”

Who would do such a daft thing?
Anyone from whom evidence to the contrary - has been withheld, lied about, or even denied outright by officialdom.

We don’t get to ever leave this dirtball - except with the help of the powers above.
Not “Thetans” not “Alien Ancestors”. Just keep it simple, and accept there is a greater, supreme being present everywhere in the universe, but that supreme being does NOT influence every single moment of every single life being lived upon Earth. The Supreme being - only needs to make the occasional “policy rollout” if you like: Those “Policies” are what we call “Mainstream Religion Scripture”.
No one “Faith” - has all the answers, a bit like the shattered shards of a crystal. You can’t have one without the other.
That’s why God never destroyed the “Other” faiths, rather than the NO faiths, the “Fake” faiths.

To a Christian - the Jew, the Islamic, the Hindu, and any other “Spiritual” based religions out there - are closer to him than anyone who worships a bit of wood or stone, anyone who worships money or power, or of course anyone who worships themselves or the human race as well. Of this latter group, I would argue that those called the “Deists” are the most dangerous by far: They’ve elevated Humanity to the point of “Self-Godhood” which attempts to doom all of humanity to the same fate as he that was cast down here in the first place… Their main “Hubris” is that Mankind can solve all of Humanity’s problems, such as World Poverty, Endless Wars, and Global Disasters - by pretending that “policy rollouts” can prevent all of that, when quite clearly it CANNOT - or such problems would have been solved weeks after a major “change the world” technology reached the masses, such as Household Hard-wired Electricity, Water on Tap, or Personally carried Communication devices…

The Deists offer Humanity the ultimate “Jam Tomrrow” deal(s). You’ll never ever see the fruition of their policies, as “If only we had a bigger majority” or “more power” or “more money donated by those we’re supposed to be allievating from poverty”… Go figure! :imp: :unamused: :angry:

The Deists - have effectively called themselves akin to the ancient “gods of Olympus” already, (Polytheistic Pantheon) and it is only a matter of time until the strongest OF them - proclaims themself in person to be God Almighty - when at last, - the “Man of Sin” shall be revealed to the world: The AntiChrist.

I “won” 60k with a series of bets,so if it was real,I would stopped at £1000 say,still annoying thoigh.I dont do any kind of gambling generally.I think its all a waste of time especially the lotto when you only have 13 million chance.Its just a fantasy dream.

Winseer:
Bookmakers - rely on people’s luck being at it’s worst - when they are over-staking, of course.

I think not.
Bookmakers generally understand chance and probability.
Gamblers (mostly) talk about “luck”.

Sploom:
I dont do any kind of gambling generally.

Weve already had Feynman mentioned on this thread. He did IIRC gamble successfully. He didnt play against the house (the house sets the odds in it`s own favour) but would have side bets with other punters. Effectively he would set the odds for a particular bet, he would become “the house” for one off bets. He won because he did understand probability theory.