Bitcoin Forum
May 03, 2024, 10:56:42 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 »
1501  Economy / Economics / Re: Economic Totalitarianism on: August 15, 2016, 01:14:41 PM
The wealth confiscation is coming.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-15/wealth-tax-looms-greeks-forced-declare-all-assets-tax-authority

Quote
The Greek finance ministry confirmed some more details of the long-planned registration of all kinds of private wealth that will go into effect in February 2017. As KeepTalkingGreece reports, more than 8,500,000 tax payers registered in Greece will be called to declare all moveable and immovable assets, their total “wealth”, and even cash they possess even if it is below 100 euro. Furthermore, the taxpayers will have to register changes in their assets when they occur and not annually.
1502  Other / Politics & Society / Re: The Bible and Slavery on: August 15, 2016, 01:36:19 AM
 
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/305549/jewish/Torah-Slavery-and-the-Jews.htm

Quote from: Rabbi Tzvi Freeman
Let's start simple:

Take an agrarian society surrounded by hostile nations. Go in there and forcefully abolish slavery. The result? War, bloodshed, hatred, prejudice, poverty and eventually, a return to slavery until the underlying conditions change. Which is pretty much what happened in the American South when the semi-industrialized North imposed their laws upon the agrarian South. And in Texas when Mexico attempted to abolish slavery among the Anglophones there.
Not a good idea. Better idea: Place humane restrictions upon the institution of indentured servitude. Yes, it's still ugly, but in the meantime, you'll teach people compassion and kindness. Educate. Make workshops. Go white-water rafting together. (Hey, why didn't Abe Lincoln think of white-water rafting?) Eventually, things change and slavery becomes an anachronism for such a society.

Which is pretty much what happened to Jewish society. Note this: At a time when Romans had literally thousands of slaves per citizen, even the wealthiest Jews held very modest numbers of servants. And those servants, the Talmud tells us, were treated better by their masters than foreign kings would treat their own subjects.
Torah teaches us how to run a libertarian society--through education and participation. Elsewhere in the world, emperors and aristocracy knew only how to govern a mass of people through oppression. Look what happened to Rome.

Getting Real Change

So you can see where I'm getting to with the slavery thing. If G d would simply and explicitly declare all the rules, precisely as He wants His world to look and what we need to do about it, the Torah would never become real to us. No matter how much we would do and how good we would be, we would remain aliens to the process.
So, too, with slavery (and there are many other examples): In the beginning, the world starts off as a place where oppressing others is a no-qualms, perfectly acceptable practice. It's not just the practice Torah needs to deal with, it's the attitude. So Torah involves us in arriving at that attitude. To the point that we will say, "Even though the Torah lets us, we don't do things that way."

Which means that we've really learnt something. And now, we can teach it to others. Because those things you're just told, those you cannot teach. You can only teach that which you have discovered on your own.
History bears this out. Historically, it has been the Oral Torah, rather than the Written Torah, that has had the greatest impact on civilization. As much as Rome ruled over Judea, Jewish values deeply transformed Rome. One of the results was the legal privileges eventually granted to slaves and the gradual recognition of the value of human life.
1503  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Health and Religion on: August 14, 2016, 05:37:05 PM
Many of these unbelieving scientists think that the universe was created by the Big Bang something like 13 billion years ago.

To be fair to the scientists there is data that supports the big bang theory.

http://www.universetoday.com/106498/what-is-the-evidence-for-the-big-bang/
Quote from: Fraser Cain
There are separate lines of evidence...

The first...

In 1912, Vesto Slipher calculated the speed and direction of “spiral nebulae” by measuring the change in the wavelengths of light coming from them. He realized that most of them were moving away from us. We now know these objects are galaxies, but a century ago astronomers thought these vast collections of stars might actually be within the Milky Way.

In 1924, Edwin Hubble figured out that these galaxies are actually outside the Milky Way. He observed a special type of variable star that has a direct relationship between its energy output and the time it takes to pulse in brightness. By finding these variable stars in other galaxies, he was able to calculate how far away they were. Hubble discovered that all these galaxies are outside our own Milky Way, millions of light-years away.

So, if these galaxies are far, far away, and moving quickly away from us, this suggests that the entire Universe must have been located in a single point billions of years ago.

The second line of evidence came from the abundance of elements we see around us.

In the earliest moments after the Big Bang, there was nothing more than hydrogen compressed into a tiny volume, with crazy high heat and pressure. The entire Universe was acting like the core of a star, fusing hydrogen into helium and other elements.

This is known as Big Bang Nucleosynthesis. As astronomers look out into the Universe and measure the ratios of hydrogen, helium and other trace elements, they exactly match what you would expect to find if the entire Universe was once a really big star.

Line of evidence number 3: cosmic microwave background radiation. In the 1960s, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were experimenting with a 6-meter radio telescope, and discovered a background radio emission that was coming from every direction in the sky – day or night. From what they could tell, the entire sky measured a few degrees above absolute zero.

Theories predicted that after a Big Bang, there would have been a tremendous release of radiation. And now, billions of years later, this radiation would be moving so fast away from us that the wavelength of this radiation would have been shifted from visible light to the microwave background radiation we see today.

To scientifically dispute the big bang theory one possible avenue is to try and disprove the wavelength data. If you can show that shift in observed wavelength may not be an indication of distance but some other phenomena you undermine the theoretical foundations of the big bang theory.

There are a small minority of astronomers who have explored this avenue.

https://youtu.be/IFFl9S39CTM

The scientist in the video above do not disprove the big bang or even the wavelength data but they do show that our scientific process especially our scientific peer review process remains quite flawed.

Here are some interesting quotes from the video.

"The leading astronomer on my committee said well look she is getting this result it doesn't fit it has to be wrong and recommend we stop
the program. That was his position.. and the majority of the people because of his position went along with him... and the peer review system which is very conformist will always do just that."  - Geoffrey Burbidge Theoretical Astrophysicist

"The theoreticians ought to be really looking at this... but I think they are all a little scared because it is an unpopular subject they are worried about their jobs and moving on up the latter if they are post docs." - Margaret Burbidge

"The young person in academia cannot afford to go against the big bang he'd immediately lose his (chance at) tenure." - John Dobson

"Don't collaborate with (him) if you do that you will have difficulties to get a position. I have received such blackmails." - Martin Lopez-Corredoira Astronomer

"The people that are in that field treat it like a religion." - Kary B. Mullis Nobel Laureate

However, my favorite quote from the video the one that truly gets to the heart of the matter was this the following.

"Now we are entering the realm of cosmology and it is here where religion philosophy metaphysics and science all meet. And make no mistake about it they all play a role in our beliefs. The amount of data that we have to support any particular model is small." - Jack Sulentic Observational Astronomer
1504  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Health and Religion on: August 14, 2016, 05:08:47 PM
Those gifted with superior intellect are not only smarter, they are also taller, healthier, and more athletic than average.

Ahaha no, and im not.

That data I cited measured averages. In any population you are going to have wide variations among individuals.
1505  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Cnn shifted this week, why? on: August 12, 2016, 05:45:36 PM
They probably realize that they risk losing credibility and influence unless they can maintain at least some appearance of neutrality.

See:

CNN Admits "We Couldn't Help [Hillary] Any More Than We Have"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-11/cnn-admits-we-couldnt-help-hillary-any-more-we-have
1506  Economy / Economics / Re: Economic Devastation on: August 12, 2016, 07:22:16 AM
Nice article on gold today in ZeroHedge

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-11/one-simple-reason-why-gold-can-still-jump-50

It touches on a number of concepts discussed in this thread including the limitations of passive capital. Overall it is quite bullish on gold. I agree with the overall analysis.
1507  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Health and Religion on: August 11, 2016, 01:47:26 PM
For philosophy, nihilism is foremost the metaphysical nihilism, that is a nihilism in ontology and epistemology (there is no eternal ontological ground, in theistic terms, world doesn't have a creator, in any sense, and therefore has no unity as the world, this lack of unity, this unity is the concept of the world, therefore onlogical nihilism can claim that there is no world, just things).

I fail to see how metaphysical nihilism does not lead inevitably to moral nihilism. On what grounds do you establish morality. You can make rules codified into law reflecting the preferences of the majority but how can anything ever be right or wrong. At best you have the preferences of a majority or realistically the preferences of the ruling elite subject to change and personal expediency. What is the inherent significance of these rules? Nothing just transient strictures that carry a degree of risk if broken. If there is no world just things what does that say about humanity itself? Well we must simply be one more group of things with no real necessary value. If you can reach any other conclusion starting from metaphysical nihilism I am curious as to how.  

This should not be confused with the simplistic claims that there is nothing, and we can't know anything as theists interpret it, but as its own metaphysical ground capable of producing rational ontology, epistemology and morals without succumbing to spiritualism. On this basis what we can say is that there is no intrinsic value, and therefore valuing is required as a finite process among other, susceptible to context and change, and because of that capable of progressing. To take values as fixed, therefore only blocks the potential progress of values and robs them of their rational basis.

Have you considered the possibility that the the end point of such a search the optimal rational ontology and morals may be ethical monotheism and if so the potential consequences of rejecting the optimum while searching for it. Ethical monotheism does not require a belief in spiritualism.

If people are not pushed a little into looking at the reality of God, they forget that they believe in God naturally, in the depths of their heart. Forget God, and you gradually forget life.

Cool

I don't agree with BADecker all the time especially with his literalism but in this instance he presents a very deep argument. In this thread I have cited multiple studies of fertility. These studies tell us that those who have rejected religion have a fertility rate below 2.1 the minimum needed for replacement of the population. Individuals who reject religion also report lower levels of health and wellbeing compared to the highly religious. Finally there is not a single current or historic non-religious group that has maintained reproductive replacement levels on the communal level.

There is a certain ironic elegance to a universe in which continued and sustained existence comes only to those who honor and respect its creator not via divine intervention but through inevitable cause and effect. Do we live in such a universe? It is entirely possible that we do.
1508  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Do you believe in god? on: August 11, 2016, 02:18:28 AM
Trouble with this thinking is, if people are not pushed a little into looking at the reality of God, they forget that they believe in God naturally, in the depths of their heart. Forget God, and you gradually forget life.

Cool

This is a very deep argument BADecker. Especially when one considers what happens in the long run to those who forget life. There is a certain ironic elegance to a universe in which continued and sustained existence comes only to those who honor and respect its creator. Do we live in such a universe? It is entirely possible that we do.
1509  Other / Off-topic / CoinCube Highlights on: August 11, 2016, 01:19:26 AM
CoinCube Highlights

Areas of Interest:
How Do We Make Society Better?
Man or Rabbit? by CS Lewis
Health and Religion
Freedom and Moral Self-Control
The Abolition of Man
An Argument for God
Understand Everything Fundamentally
Finance: Part 1, 2, 3
Awake In The Night Land (Book Review)
Intervention Theory
Debate on Nihilism
Kurt Gödel
Way of God
The Platonia Dilemma
Music that Illuminates the Human Condition
1510  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Health and Religion on: August 10, 2016, 11:44:34 PM
At its most pure and fundamental level knowledge is faith and faith is knowledge.
This is the essential difference between theism/spiritualism and nihilism, it is the question of epistemology, of what is knowledge. I know that this equation of knowledge with faith is false or at least self-defeating. I agree, atheism is false, but that it is false exactly to the extent that its still not absolute nihilism. It is because people still think of the world in an essentially spiritualistic way, that they fear nihilism and it is because they are still spiritualists, that they have something to fear from nihilism. But to know there is no intrinsic value is the knowledge required to know what value in general is, how to create it and improve it. By having faith in intrinsic value, one is abandoning the quest for knowledge of value, and thus any chance of progress. It is accepting the world as it is, barbaric and unjust. Spiritualists believe in writings on the wall only because they still live behind one.

As a nihilist I think higher of people that, like CoinCube, know the reasons for their belief, no matter how false, than of those that believe blindly and quote inspirational posters as the basis of their belief.

It is a bit late to respond this post but later is better than never.

There are various shades of nihilism but essentially nihilism holds that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value, that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived. Human or even the entire human species is essentially insignificant, without purpose and unlikely to change in the totality of existence. What is the antithesis of nihilism? I would argue that it is faith.

Faith holds that life has inherent meaning. It proclaims that there is an objective status for ethical ideals grounded in the very bedrock of creation. It teaches that man is created "in the image of God," and therefore has inherent dignity and immense value. It offers mankind a purpose in this universe.

I respect nihilists as they are almost always members of the intellectual elite. However, I believe the philosophy itself is inherently dangerous and self-destructive.  

http://www.arasite.org/WL3/nietnihil.html#_ftn1
Quote from: Dr. W Large
It (nihilism) is the continued destruction of all meaning and signification. It is the belief that nothing really matters any more, because nothing really has any meaning. We have no system of beliefs or values which could orientate us. The old systems of belief, like religion and morality, still exist, but at best we only follow them half-heartedly, and at worst, think that they have no meaning whatsoever.  They exist only the edges of our lives and consciousnesses. But it isn’t just the world that doesn’t have any meaning anymore. We ourselves don’t have any meaning to ourselves. Why should we choice one course of action over the other? What does it really matter anymore, since no-one’s individual life really has any significance in the grand scheme of things...

Nothing is worth much anymore, everything comes down to the same thing, everything is equalized. Everything is the same and equivalent: the true and the false, the good and the bad. Everything is outdated, used up, old dilapidated, dying: an undefined agony of meaning, an unending twilight: not a definite annihilation of significations, but their indefinite collapse.

By rejecting intrinsic value, one is not abandoning the quest for value but certifying the absence of value. Faith demands we not accept the world as it is. Faith provides an ideal and asks us for ethical perfection. It is a goal we fall far short of a world to strive for. Nihilism provides none of these things for at its heart it is a philosophy of emptiness.
1511  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 09, 2016, 03:05:58 PM
Ya know after reading this it sure seems like humans were created in Africa some 60,000 to 70,000 years ago. Before that we were just neanderthals.

So I guess "gods" created us by altering neanderthals dna and out we came with intelligence. Just like that.. sure.. gods.. okay. idiots.

*clap....clap....clap*
I am blown away by the depth of your insight MisO69. After all perhaps a 5th grader could tell you that you can't create light before stars, that the Big Bang was caused by some random fluctuations and it is so obvious that dark energy is causing the universe to expand.

No point in questioning these things all these mysteries are solved.
1512  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 09, 2016, 11:13:01 AM

Perhaps when scientists add all kinds of other theories and ideas, their model will change. They do have some serious science fiction there, or a religion if they believe it in the face of it not having been proven true.

Cool

I agree that the model will change. That is almost a certainty astronomy is not my area of expertise but it takes very little digging to hit the limits of human understanding. For example a few years ago scientist realized that according to the readings we have the universe is expanding at an increasing not a decreasing rate. However, we did not have any logical explanation for this so we made up one "dark energy" does it really exist or is the model wrong. I suspect the latter but it is the most widely accepted model currently.

However, a lot of smart people have worked on the model and while it is almost a certainty parts of it will change it is also possible that other parts will stand the test of time. Personally I see no conflict between the model and Genesis but that is not an interpretation that everyone will share.

Quote
The early universe, from the Quark epoch to the Photon epoch, (The universe was opaque or "foggy" as a result. There was light)

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.God saw that the light was good,

followed by the "Dark Ages", from 380,000 years to about 150 million years.

and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.”

When the photons were released (or decoupled) the universe became transparent

And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
1513  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 08, 2016, 09:48:21 PM

I always liked how God created light on the first day, and the sun and stars (which make the light, and the 24-hr day) on day 4...  That's quite a magic trick!

...

If I were God... I'd probably create the sun, stars and light all at the same time... and then I'd create plants afterwards... but that's just me... perhaps I'm smarter than God... perhaps a 5th grader could tell you that you can't create light before stars...

You can't create light before stars... are you sure about that?



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe
Quote
The early universe, from the Quark epoch to the Photon epoch, or the first 380,000 years of cosmic time, when the familiar forces and elementary particles have emerged but the universe remains in the state of a plasma, followed by the "Dark Ages", from 380,000 years to about 150 million years during which the universe was transparent but no large-scale structures had yet formed

Before decoupling occurred, most of the photons in the universe were interacting with electrons and protons in the photon–baryon fluid. The universe was opaque or "foggy" as a result. There was light but not light we can now observe through telescopes. The baryonic matter in the universe consisted of ionized plasma, and it only became neutral when it gained free electrons during "recombination", thereby releasing the photons creating the CMB. When the photons were released (or decoupled) the universe became transparent.

According to current scientific models there was hundreds of thousands of years of light without stars.

Genesis 1-3:
Quote
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
1514  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 08, 2016, 04:36:30 PM

I agree with much of what you say. But the length of time is way off. It is secular timelines based on speculation and misinformation. The Bible record is clear that the earth is only about 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

Cool

I tend to lean towards the following explanation regarding biblical timelines though I understand that there are differing schools of thought.

http://www.thejewishweek.com/editorial-opinion/sabbath-week/was-creation-really-seven-days
Quote from: Shlomo Riskin
The Bible is not interested in conveying literal and chronological facts in its story of Creation. After all, the sun and the moon were not created until the fourth day, and it is specifically their movements which are the determinants for our 24-hour day. Beyond any doubt, then, “yom” (day) in the context of the seven days of Creation cannot mean a literal 24-hour day.
...
Maimonides, in his “Guide for the Perplexed,” interprets all biblical stories until the advent of Abraham as allegories, whose purpose is to convey moral lessons
...
And this certainly leaves the door open to maintain that “One thousand (or one million) years in Your eyes is like one day” [Psalms 90:4]. Each biblical day in the Creation story may well represent an epoch of thousands or millions or years.
1515  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 08, 2016, 07:51:42 AM
Hard to believe that the Indo-Europeans, negros, and the Japanese are descended from Adam and Eve.

Why do you find that hard to believe?


https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/human-journey/
Quote
According to the genetic and paleontological record, we only started to leave Africa between 60,000 and 70,000 years ago. What set this in motion is uncertain, but we think it has something to do with major climatic shifts that were happening around that time—a sudden cooling in the Earth’s climate driven by the onset of one of the worst parts of the last Ice Age. This cold snap would have made life difficult for our African ancestors, and the genetic evidence points to a sharp reduction in population size around this time. In fact, the human population likely dropped to fewer than 10,000. We were holding on by a thread.

It is the survivors of this near extinction who appear to have made some form of fundamental technological, social or evolutionary leap that allowed humanity to break the prior constraints which had kept its population small and limited to Africa.

http://blog.23andme.com/news/the-first-population-explosion-human-numbers-expanded-dramatically-millennia-before-agriculture/
Quote
The authors found genetic evidence for a surge in human population size about 40,000 to 50,000 years ago. This period, just after humans first set foot outside Africa, is of great interest to archaeologists because it coincides with a dramatic increase in the sophistication of human behavior. People began crafting tools from bone, burying their dead and fashioning clothing to keep themselves warm in cool climates. They developed complex hunting techniques, and created great works of art in the form of cave paintings and jewelry.

The archaeological record also shows that during this time, humans began hunting more dangerous prey and more easily exploiting small game like rabbits and birds. They traveled farther than they had before, perhaps due to the growth of long-distance trade routes – the first of their kind. Jared Diamond, author of The Third Chimpanzee, calls this period “The Great Leap Forward,” when humans burst forth culturally – finally separating themselves from their evolutionary cousins.

The exact cause for these changes in human behavior may never be known. Some believe a simple genetic mutation or that the evolution of language could have sparked such a dramatic change. But what we do know now, thanks to this new genetic research, is that like the (much later) invention of agriculture this explosion of innovation was accompanied by population growth.

In the Biblical story of Adam and Eve Our ancestors are warned not to eat of the fruit of the “Etz Hadaath,” the “Tree of Knowledge” for as long as They did not eat of it, they were like angels who do only good. The fruit of the “Tree of Knowledge,” however, changed this.

People interpret this story in different ways but I tend to view it as instructive parable. A primitive species in a natural competitive equilibrium can be thought of as living in a garden. Breaching this equilibrium requires knowledge. Sometime around 70,000 years ago our ancient ancestors acquired the knowledge needed to explosively overcome the constraints that had previously kept our numbers and progress in check. We ceased living as a part of nature and began to dominate it.

This breakthrough led to the spread of humanity throughout the world and possibly made inevitable the later agricultural revolution. Having broken our natural constraints we are now compelled to continue our relentless climb up the tree of knowledge until we grow knowledgeable enough to voluntarily establish new ones for ourselves.
1516  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 08, 2016, 03:27:34 AM
Religion or rules of behavior were designed to limit the killing so as not to destroy our selves with too much killing.

There are many ways to destroy ourselves in an era of unrestrained hedonism.

Modern society is a mechanism for inculcating bad habits, especially the habit of seeking instant pleasure, intoxications and distractions; a habit of regarding ourselves as passive recipients for ‘entertainment’. A devout life is not so much about a flash of understanding but is mostly a matter of using insights into truth in building-up good habits; and this can be influenced by our will. A devout life enables one to build these habits and most importantly successfully pass them on to our children.

Quote from:  Terryl and Fiona Givens
Whatever sense we make of this world, whatever value we place upon our lives and relationships, whatever meaning we ultimately give to our joys and agonies, must necessarily be a gesture of faith. Whether we consider the whole a product of impersonal cosmic forces, a malevolent deity, or a benevolent god, depends not on the evidence, but on what we choose, deliberately and consciously to conclude from that evidence… If we decide to leave the questions unanswered, that is a choice; if we waver in our answer that too is a choice: but whatever choice we make, we make it at our peril.

What we choose to embrace, to be responsive to, is the purest reflection of who we are and what we love. That is why faith, the choice to believe, is, in the final analysis, an action that is positively laden with moral significance.
1517  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 08, 2016, 01:49:01 AM
There are several flaws in your arguments Alik Bashi

You argue that the various schisms in monotheism leads to conflict, but yet neglect a rational comparison of the alternatives holding what appears to be an idealized vision of peaceful polytheism in the ancient world.  

You argue that the history of paganism did not know endless religious wars. This is false the religious wars were just smaller scale and everywhere this nature deity vs that one. This tribes god versus another or at its peak this city's Athena vs that cities Ares.
  
You argue that monotheism only allows one to be moral and kind to ones own group but this is false. He is a example from Judaism but there are others.

http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/gentiles.html
Quote from: Gil Student
In the Jewish worldview all gentiles who are ethical monotheists will achieve salvation. Judaism does not denigrate gentiles and does not see them as condemened to eternal damnation. Rather we see them as fellow human beings, from other nations, searching for G-d and for meaning in life. Judaism wishes them well with their search and celebrates those who succeed in becoming ethical monotheists. Jews are obligated in many rituals and ceremonies and those Jews who fail to fulfill these rituals are considered sinners. Gentiles, however, are not obligated in these commandments and are only obligated to be ethical monotheists. Those who fulfill this obligation receive their full reward in the world-to-come.

You conclude by highlighting the evils perpetuated by man on man and blame monotheism when in fact ethical monotheism is the single most powerful force that battles and discourages these evils.  

In short I believe you are totally and completely mistaken.
1518  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Monotheism is Evil, separating the human race on: August 08, 2016, 01:19:15 AM
Ethical monotheism is probably the single greatest contributor to human progress from any source since human culture emerged from the stone ages. This force which emerged first in Judaism and and spread throughout the world via the mediums of Christianity and Islam continues to shape human destiny even in a time when much of the world foolishly rejects it as irrelevant.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/mono.html
Quote from: Dennis Prager
Nature is amoral. Nature knows nothing of good and evil. In nature there is one rule—survival of the fittest. There is no right, only might. If a creature is weak, kill it. Only human beings could have moral rules such as, "If it is weak, protect it." Only human beings can feel themselves ethically obligated to strangers.
...
Nature allows you to act naturally, i.e., do only what you want you to do, without moral restraints; God does not. Nature lets you act naturally - and it is as natural to kill, rape, and enslave as it is to love.
...
One of the vital elements in the ethical monotheist revolution was its repudiation of nature as god. The evolution of civilization and morality have depended in large part on desanctifying nature.
...
Civilizations that equated gods with nature—a characteristic of all primitive societies—or that worshipped nature did not evolve.
...
Words cannot convey the magnitude of the change wrought by the Bible's introduction into the world of a God who rules the universe morally.
...
ethical monotheism suggests more than that God demands ethical behavior; it means that Gods primary demand is ethical behavior. It means that God cares about how we treat one another more than He cares about anything else.

Thus, ethical monotheism's message remains as. radical today as when it was first promulgated. The secular world has looked elsewhere for its values, while even many religious Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe that Gods primary demand is something other than ethics.


http://old.explorefaith.org/neighbors/beliefs/nature_j.html
Quote from: Howard Greenstein
To hold that God is the Source and Sustainer of moral values is to insist upon an objective status for ethical ideals. They are not the impulsive fabrication of human minds, but are grounded in the very bedrock of creation. Moral laws have objective validity similar to the laws of physics. They are not our invention, but it is for us to discover them. Just as it would be foolish to defy the law of gravity and hope to escape its consequences, so is it perilous to presume that a human infant can grow to emotional maturity without ever being loved or cared for. In both cases the penalty for ignoring the law is a natural consequence of defying the given realities of the universe. The uniqueness of God in this context is the complex but delicate blend of both physical and spiritual reality in a single deity which accounts for the balance, harmony and order of nature within us and without.

Ethical monotheism is not just a way of talking about God. It is a way of understanding human experience; it is a way of organizing the world in which we live. It is a faith that attempts to explain what we do not know by beginning with what we do know. We do know our awareness of this world is rooted in a unity of our own senses. We do know that defiance of moral law invites a disaster as devastating as any contempt for the laws of physics or chemistry or biology. We know, in short, that we cannot fathom it all and that this world is ultimately grounded in mystery. And that singular ethical mystery is what we call God
1519  Economy / Economics / Re: Economic Totalitarianism on: August 06, 2016, 12:09:29 AM

Singapore is actually a pretty cool place to be honest, they have a lot of stuff and they're pretty advanced relative to a lot of the other countries in the general area, and they have a good economy last I heard of. I agree with all of your points about the property in Singapore though, especially looking at some of the negatives. The 15% tax won't be harsh on the market in a year or two though, and there should be less downward movement with the value of the property soon.

There should be some cool things that'll happen with the Singapore economy soon, and I'll be looking at it more over the next few months.

Interesting article on coindesk today talking about how Singapore is setting itself up to be at the forefront of blockchain developments.

http://www.coindesk.com/singapore-central-bank-blockchain-ceos/

1520  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Why do Atheists hate Religion ? on: August 05, 2016, 02:40:28 AM

An interesting video thanks for sharing
Pages: « 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!