Religious rants

You said a lot Gabriel so let me answer a few things. "That being the case, I would like to see how exactly acting on pure logic fixes the human condition?" You can't, most humans don't act on pure logic. Most humans are emotional creatures that act intuition and gut feeling. Even if humans were completely logical beings. Humans would still fuck each other over. That's beside the point. I don't care about the fixing the human condition. The human condition might very well be unfixable. No amount of logic or empathy or kumbaya can fix the human condition. Guess what as well? Holy religious text isn't going to fix the human condition either. How do I know this? Well because those holy religious text have been around for thousands of years to fix the human condition. And guess what? Your holy text still hasn’t fixed the human condition. In fact, some have made the argument that religion has made the human condition worse by starting entire wars and creating divisions. I don't think all the world’s problems like hunger, poverty, war etc. would be solved if everyone tomorrow suddenly became Christian. Don't think me so naive and gullible to think that your holy religious text can solve all the ills of the world. "What statistics show being cruel isn't a better system than being kind?" Very open-ended question. So, I'll answer it in a very open-ended way as well. It depends on what your objective and situation is. If you’re a dictator of some third world nation. Then cruelty is an effective way to get people to fear you and get shit done. If you’re a caretaker for elderly people. Then beating an old man with a stick isn’t an effective way to take care of them xD. Elderly people that need care lack full human motor abilities and human cognition. Kindness and empathy are more effective to deal with elderly people that need care. From a purely pragmatic point of view. To effectively reach your goal. Employing cruelty vs kindness really depends on the situation and objective you’re trying to reach. "What measurements would it take to put all world governments in proper order?" Don't tell me. Put the fear if God into the world governments. Will God come down and smite dee evil governments? Will God put them into proper order? Here's a reality check. No such magical measurements exist to bring world governments into proper order. But here's another question. Define proper order. Your proper order? Why is your proper order the correct proper order? Pandus Christian proper order? Catholic proper order? What about other religions? The way you define proper order and the way a Muslims define proper order will not be the same. No real-world remedy exists to bring governments into a so-called proper order. "Give me the value that answers the age old questions of A) Life's Meaning” I assume for you that God = meaning of life. No, I reject that notion. It sounds cliche, but life is what you make it. Life could be very well be completely meaningless. The entire planet could be swallowed up by a black hole and the entire universe wouldn't care or notice. Life could be drunken sex parties and snorting coke every day. Life could be watching anime every day then jerking off to sleep. Life could be a monastic life living like a hermit and praying to Jesus every day. Your meaning of life isn't the same as my meaning of life or somebody's else's meaning of life. A Christians can live a rich and meaningful life with their belief in God. Likewise, a person can live a rich and meaningful life without ever believing in God. “B) What Success Does A Mortal Man Bring To A Dying World?” It depends on what someone accomplished while they were alive. July is named after Julius Caesar. I would say that Julius Cesar had a pretty successful life if you’re so bad ass that an entire month is named after you. Michelangelo was successful because of his brilliant artistic mind. Einstein was successful because of his brilliant scientific mind. What success you bring to the world depends on what the fuck you did while you were alive. If you are were nobody. Like me, you or pretty much anybody else. You'll be forgotten once you die. It's as simple as that. Sorry, not sorry.

"Then my rebuttal is all you've shown me is that their are clearly other Atheists posing as Theists in pursuit of your God of Money and Self-service. Am I mistaken, Aleph?" Yes, you are mistaken. God of money? Nice rhetorical trick. Money isn't God. Money is an object. A very nice object to have. But an object nonetheless. I'm not out here praying to a calf made out of paper fiat. Please God of money! Bring me more MOONAH! But I'll play along. Let's go with the hypothetical. Since I know some of you weabuus love hypotheticals. Let's say that I did love money as much as you love God. Guess what? The love of money. The love of God. Both of those loves are morally equivalent. Reeeeeee! Yes, yes, I know. Your morality negates this. But here's the thing about morality. Morality is subjective. Why is morality subjective? At a very simplistic level. Morality is based on a set of rules. Morals are derived from those set of rules. Here's a simple rule that many vegans believe. Killing animals is equivalent to killing humans. Non vegans reject the moral rules of vegans and eat meat. Here's a spicier moral conflict. Many Christians believe that life begins at conception. But alas, according to the Hadith. Sunni Muslims believe that God imparts the soul into an infant at 120 days into gestation. In other words. Life begins at conception for many Christians, but life begins at 120 days of gestation for Sunni Muslims. Sunni Muslims do not see abortion as Christians see abortion. How do you reconcile those two opposing moral belief systems? One believes that life begins at conception. Another believes that life begins after 120 days of gestation. Both believe in divine revelation. Both believe in the word of God. Both believe that their morally comes from God. These two moral systems are irreconcilable. On a broader scale, some moral systems are irreconcilable. Which ultimately means that there is no one true objective morality. Morally is all based on what rules you believe and follow. So, to get back to the god of money question. Someone devoting their entire life to just obtaining money is no more morally good or bad than someone devoting their entire life to monastic life praying to God. It all depends on the underlying morally that one believes. "If Aleph can respect wordly understanding when it proves fruitful and just, then how can he waste his time here playing the role of ignorant teacher? If one has knowledge to give then do share, but if one has nothing outside of contemptuous banter perhaps he would be suited elsewhere more appropriate with that infinite wisdom? Those videos only feature people justifying their personal contempt for others by saying it's in self defense. Coincidentally so too are those in bad faith. If bad faith is met with contempt then how can either side break this cycle of ignorance? That was my question specifically for Aleph" Oh, the contempt! What's next? Oh, you’re so mean! You done clutching your pearls gabriel? You really scrapping bottom of the barrel with your moral grandstanding. Here's a thought. If people don't like their ideas being ripped apart. Then simply don't post them. As simple as that. Here's an analogous situation. Let's say some flat earther went on some random sidewalk and he/she started preaching about the earth being flat. I walked along the sidewalk and I engaged the flat earther. I explained the physics of round earth. Then the flat earther repeatedly kept arguing the same points. I explain the physics again and call them a retard. Then you come along clutching your pearls with your virtue signaling about contempt. Oh my god aleph! The contempt will continue this cycle of ignorance! Listen, if the flat earther has the balls to start preaching flat earther ideas on a sidewalk. Then the flat earther should have the balls to have their ideas challenged and disrespected. Likewise, Pandus, you or anybody else has the balls to make a thread called “Religious rant” then make post preaching their beliefs. Then they should have the balls to have their ideas challenged and disrespected. When it comes to politics and religion. I don't know where this silly idea came from that you have to respect someone's else’s politics and religion. You are under no moral or ethical obligation to respect someone's else's politics, religion or any ideas for that matter. Maybe your ethics and morality obligate you respect someone else’s ideas. But not mine. I'm not here to change the world or be anybody’s savior. I leave the savior complex to Christians. I’m not here to win sympathy points by being nice. I’m not here to wins peoples’ heart. I engage partly to troll, partly to spin your brains around because it’s funny, partly because I’m bored, partly a lil serious. Nothing more and nothing less.

Although you seem to have a bit of a superiority complex, I like the way you think, even if I too have opinions and opinions that differ.

@alephy I thank you for taking the time to reply. I don't take everything you say without informed purpose. When I replied to your videos I was bringing up the same point you made about myself. That one is not without question. So if you can post critically, so can I. What I was focused on was that those Atheists you mentioned had a morality attached to their arguments. That Atheism had a more effective strategy to improving the world we lived in. What they asked of the religious, they too, were not without criticism. When I say God of money it is not literal. It is metaphorical. We do not live alone on an island, so with moderation we make informed decisions based in discipline. Your focus is what you're able to hold in your hands and therefore place greater emphasis on it. Perhaps for this world's purpose that's enough, however there does appear to be much more to this world as we discover and learn alongside other people. I can appreciate the frustration fundamentalists have created for others attempting to balance spiritual growth while in the physical. Their "my way or the highway" approach reflects a similar pattern of a non-believer who wants only for themselves. Both are equally contemptible. Have I been a hypocrite by failing the scriptures in times of trial. That is a truth. However you too make it a point to correct others on a daily basis. We are if nothing else human as you eloquently put it. Again, thank you Aleph for sharing with me your knowledge. May it better inform me in future endeavors, so I don't continue to be a hypocritical weaboo.

@gabriel_true I do agree with Dr. Tyson's viewpoints that it is not the scientific discovery that is evil in of itself. Smelting iron led to very durable tools that we have used to grow our food such as shovels and rakes, but also as a means of destruction in the form of the sword. We use radioactive material to sterilize food and medical supplies, namely Cobalt-60. We have also used it to create some of the most devastating weapons the world has ever known. My big issue is that without an underlying moral structure we are in trouble. With subjective morality, you can justify virtually anything. It is building society on a foundation of sand where the basic moral structure can change simply because of the whims of the powers that be. The average person does not have any grasp on what the moral structure is and how to operate in such a society. It doesn't need to be a macro issue either. We have examples in California. An example being do not steal, it is amoral and in most other places illegal. However we see that people are stealing to the point that businesses refuse to operate in certain areas due to two factors. One is the legal issue where these thefts are no longer charged. Second is the moral structure which has erroded to justify stealing. As far as the distrust in science. I do believe that it does have to do with the coalition of governing bodies determining the science. It is totally warranted if you ask me. Since transgederism is a big subject, we are going to use that. There are scientific bodies including Tyson that state that a man can be a woman. So scientifically the person is not a woman. We can determine that through bone structure and genetics that a person is a man. However because person identifies as a woman, we have to recognize it as such. The problem is that it isn't based off of scientific information, it is based off of the subjective and anecdotal account of an individual. So when scientists say it is a woman despite the information we know determining what is male and female, it calls the whole mechanism into question.

I forgot how hilarious this scene from Good Omens is about Noah's Ark lol. https://youtu.be/sAs56Zz9NUU

Inform yourselves fellow Christians. Reevaluate the catholic faith, these popes have a reoccuring theme. He held faith in himself and not God almighty, he anticipated evil will prevail and hitler would win. He lied allowed jews to be killed, and the vatican covered it up. They hide all their evil. https://youtu.be/T7fV1KOcR7U

Here is a video diving deep into pagan religious holidays like good friday, easter sundsy, and christmas. Also how there were no 3 wise men that came upon Jesus's birth written in the bible. I mean i kinda already didnt celebrate some of these holidays like good friday and easter, but im gonna cut out Christmas too. https://youtu.be/uL43mSH3oOI

In other news im gonna research if we truly should have stopped things like passover and the feast of the tabernacle celebrated 15 july for 7 days straight. Im not exactly that far into the bible where it speaks about jesus. But there is speculation that none of those things stopped simply due to Jesus's death. Im in a weird moment, im trying to sort some stuff out and discover the truth about Jesus, the God of the sons of Israel and the holy trinity. Im curious why God's chosen people dont accept Jesus as God. They also say that jesus says the father is greater than I. As their reasoning, theology is quite fascinating.