RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 8:33:18 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Differentiating over the Quantum Reality Theory: Dim QRT. Consider possiblities in which a God exists versus do not as a ratio. Apply Laplace as appropriate in finding the limit.

Unless you assert a ratio of zero, your model proves the existence of a deity by definition.

Well, if it did form a ratio of 1, then it'd be a proof of God. (Actually, when I was Catholic, this is one of the first theories I stumbled upon to. I was trying to prove God. It backfired when I ran the numbers.) If it's 0, it disproves God. If it's any value inbetween, it's inconclusive (though does provide a probability). If it's negative or greater than one, the programmer needs to be reeducated. :P

It turns out to approach zero at a magnitude of infinity squared, if I remember rightly. (Which sets it equal to zero by definition.)

Edit: Darn typo.

< Message edited by CuriousLord -- 8/30/2007 8:34:28 PM >

(in reply to celticlord2112)

Post #: 81

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 8:45:20 PM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
even if a God should be made of a material completely unknown to us, using laws of Physics we can't even begin to understand, etc., he is still part of our universe and therefore falls into the theory.

Yes, that's the other flaw in the construct. Essentially, it's a straw man argument. An entity which created the universe (i.e., God) has a relationship to the universe but must be separate from the universe.

_____________________________

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 82

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 8:55:21 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
even if a God should be made of a material completely unknown to us, using laws of Physics we can't even begin to understand, etc., he is still part of our universe and therefore falls into the theory.

Yes, that's the other flaw in the construct. Essentially, it's a straw man argument. An entity which created the universe (i.e., God) has a relationship to the universe but must be separate from the universe.

The universe is, by definition, anything in any way possibly related to it at any point. For example, I would call what might be colloquially referred to as a "parallel universe" as just another part of our own- that the universe just happens to be different from what we thought it was. Still, if you subscribe to a different definition of "universe", I'd ask you use mine for the purpose of the argument. (Whatever the word isn't doesn't matter- it's the concept I'm trying to point out.)

PS- I'd like to thank you for the curteousy, especially if my aggressive voice slipped out earlier. It's been a hard issue for me in the past, so I can be overly zealous on the subject.

(in reply to celticlord2112)

Post #: 83

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 9:13:12 PM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

quote:

The universe is, by definition, anything in any way possibly related to it at any point.

Unless you're prepared to argue in favor of a self-referential construct, there must be a distinction between the creator and the created.

Otherwise, your argument collapses into circular reasoning as it necessitates the nonexistence of the deity as a predicate condition.

(Perplex, I do apologize for hijacking the thread...this sort of debate is...just too damn tempting to resist!

)

_____________________________

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 84

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 9:22:29 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

The universe is, by definition, anything in any way possibly related to it at any point.

Unless you're prepared to argue in favor of a self-referential construct, there must be a distinction between the creator and the created.

Otherwise, your argument collapses into circular reasoning as it necessitates the nonexistence of the deity as a predicate condition.

What circular bit do you see? The argument don't rely on eachother, which would be circular logic.

Also, I'm disconcerned with who or what created who or what. I'm arguing the entire system- as a whole. Should a God have been a creator, an observer, or anything else, is entirely irrelevant to the validity of the argument.

Edit: My grammar and spelling aren't showing it, but my logic is still strong. I'm sorry to have to do this, but it's too sensitive of a subject for me to both remain calm about and give any more than a small amount of attention to. (After all, I was rather attached to the religion I so adamently argue against. I know it to be false, but that doesn't mean I've forgotten the sweet promises of eternal life and seeing beloved deceased again in a place of great happiness. Perhaps this is one reason I hate religion so- it demands those who grew up with it to sacarfice something that they so hoped for if they ever hope to realize the truth.)

< Message edited by CuriousLord -- 8/30/2007 9:40:21 PM >

(in reply to celticlord2112)

Post #: 85

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 9:24:15 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

[Deleted: Double post.]

< Message edited by CuriousLord -- 8/30/2007 9:25:10 PM >

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 86

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 10:08:30 PM

luckydog1

Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline

There are problems with Cls "proofs", that do not require doing any math to notice. Take the finite Box over infinite time. Actually the particles in the box would simply sit motionless for all of time, unless the box is being shaken (Energy being applied in some form). Also Science has not proven that time is infinite. Scientists debate it vigorously, and there are several schools of thought. Most of which hold that Time and Space are linked (time/space, which is why the speed of light is the speed limit of the universe, something Cl has argued as true in other threads)and both came into existance at the same time. There is no evidence that Time exists beyond Space. There is a theory that Time is infinite, and others that it is not. We have observed that time does change related to speed, so it is not an eternal, seperate constant. My point is that the leading scientists in the world have not even accepted a single theory on this stuff, much less proved one. Yet Cl has. He has read and pondered the existing thoeries and decided which one is correct(basically because it is the theory that makes him feel good, which is what he accuses religious people of doing). So time is infinte, why, because Cl says so. Not really much of a proof. The nature of our Universe and can there be anything beyond it, again, he chooses the theory he likes and declares it fact, because he says so (regardless of the fact that real scientists haven't made up thier minds on it yet). Would a entity made up of Energy have to die? Cl says so with not a shred of empirical evidence to base it on.

And he gets to make up his own defintions of Athiest and Agnostic, nice again why? Because he likes those definitions. And anyone who disagrees just isn't smart enough to understand.

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 87

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 10:20:40 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

There are problems with Cls "proofs", that do not require doing any math to notice. Take the finite Box over infinite time. Actually the particles in the box would simply sit motionless for all of time, unless the box is being shaken (Energy being applied in some form). [...] And anyone who disagrees just isn't smart enough to understand.

An interesting approach to reading is to read the introduction, then the conclusion, before reading the entire thing. Heh. Forgive my arrogant self, though I do love the irony in your start and finish.

I'd suggest you look up "black box"- probably on Wikipedia. I.. have a feeling you're misunderstanding the concept. Heh.. I'm sorry, it's just.. what you said was very silly, and perfectly matches the notion "just isn't smart enough to understand". I know it's arrogant to be laughing at, which likely at least makes your point that I'm not without some measure of self-respect, but you have to admit, after you read it, it is sort of funny.

Edit: I.. read over your reply. Don't worry, I don't take offense, even if it was meant like that. Just.. well, I'm not sure a polite way of saying this, so bluntly: your view of Physics really needs an overhaul. The entire thing you typed looked like a major misunderstanding. And I don't mean small points- it seems like you missed the entire thing outside of the purpose (acting as a proof).

Since I'd sort of feel like an ass not to at least elaborate a bit.. (though, to be blunt, I have no patience to explain so much Physics in such a short time..)
-A black box isn't a literal black box. It's a hypothetical grouping of inner boundaries, typically used in Engineering to break down large systems into smaller ones gradually, or to build up smaller systems into a larger system gradually. It's also the basic concept one needs to acknowledge in dealing with a particle, or, well.. you know, I'd just recommend looking it up. It's a really important concept to understand, and not just for theoritical Physics!
-The link between mass/energy has been long established in the mainsteam, formally related in Einstein's "E=mc^2". My proof has nothing to do with this, but just since you mentioned it.
-Time's a construct. It exists inside or outside of space as you care to define it. It wouldn't matter either way. (Again, not that my theory mentions time outside of space.)
-Time does not change with regards to speed. That's a misgnomer from people trying to grasp at basic relativity. (Effective time might be considered in this manner, but not proper time.)
-Erm.. this is less Physics and more your perception of others. You really think I chose a theory where I damn myself to mortality? For what, popularity? Hah, yeah, people love you when you tell them that their pleasant view of reality is false, as I'm sure you like me right now.
-"Real scientists" aren't sure if there's anything beyond the universe? That question's so dated... hell, they probably could've answered that in ancient Greece.. what in the world made you think this?
-What made you think I was talking about an entity of pure energy..?
-Does someone have a better definition? Or are you under some kind of illusion that everyone who believes in something is always sure about it?

In any case, there ya go. ;)

< Message edited by CuriousLord -- 8/30/2007 10:46:55 PM >

(in reply to luckydog1)

Post #: 88

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/30/2007 11:24:17 PM

MisterPervert

Posts: 39
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Australia
Status: offline

Forgive me all, I thoroughly enjoy the intellectual banter in this thread - and hope it continues. This is a short reply:

Post-modernist thought is SO 20th century. In the words of Tolstoy, Nietzsche was an idiot.

"Absolutes" (aka fundamental truth) is a touchy subject. There is much post-modernist thinking about absolutes (and in particular, the notion there aren't any) - but in physics, there is - if you make a leap to faith - the belief in "absolute zero" temperature.

Post-modernist dualties also fall down in the area of "absolute truth" if you accept that - if there are no absolute truths, then there can be no absolute lies. In other words - "Weapons of Mass Destruction" is no more a lie than it is a truth. Sorry to introduce any politics into a religion thread :) Rodney King beaten? As seen by video "evidence"? There is no truth and thus, who cares?

My intellectual barrow is a simple one - I'm with the solipsists ::)

You and me, baybee! Let's get nekkid and ... um ... nevermind...

_____________________________

Mister Pervert - The Pervert Messiah

"He's NOT the Messiah! He's a very naughty boy!"

"Jesus died because he forgot his safeword."

http://misterpevert.blogspot.com

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 89

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 12:30:21 AM

luckydog1

Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline

ok, I looked up "black box" on wikipedia. "In physics, a black box is a system whose internal structure is unknown, or need not be considered for a particular purpose. Sometimes black box is used as a synonym for black body." Thats all that was relevant to what you are refering to. I am well aware of Schrodingers cat, and the fact you can't tell the exact quantum state of a sub particle in the box. You seem to making assertions as to what will happen in the box(even though by definition it is un known). Which does not change the fact that Real scientists (those who already have their degrees and get paid to work on this stuff) do not agree on several of the issues you state as the fact of reality. That there is infinite time is not a scientific fact. That it does not go backwards an infinite amount, is agreed on for the most part. Whether it will continue on infinitly or not is the subject of debate, and can not be stated as fact one way or the other. Yet your proof depends on it.

What do you call a logical proof that depends on un proved premises?

Time does flow at different speeds. "In relativity, proper time is time measured by a single clock between events that occur at the same place as the clock. It depends not only on the events but also on the motion of the clock between the events. An accelerated clock will measure a shorter proper time between two events than a non-accelerated (inertial) clock between the same events. The twins paradox is an example of this."

I didn't say you were talking about a being of pure energy, I said that. To point out your assumption stated as fact that God is a creature that has to die, is just an assusmption.

"-Does someone have a better definition? Or are you under some kind of illusion that everyone who believes in something is always sure about it?" You were already given dictionary definitions of the words.

You proved that literal Catholicism isn't absolutly true, not that there is no God.

(in reply to MisterPervert)

Post #: 90

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 12:52:18 AM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

Acknowledging the logical preference for simplicity, I suggest we start with a basic universal principal....

The one that always works for Me is a variant of Descartes:

Coito ergo sum

If you're going to do solipsism, best to do it right!

_____________________________

(in reply to MisterPervert)

Post #: 91

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 7:26:01 AM

cloudboy

Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

I don't believe in god and he walked up and held out his hand I wouldn't shake it. Anyone with infinite power who created polio and MS deserves nothing but scorn. I used to say as a kid if I found out god really existed I would raise an army to fight he/she/it.

You're assuming God's a micromanager.

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 92

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 7:34:46 AM

Celeste43

Posts: 3066
Joined: 2/4/2006
From: NYS
Status: offline

Primo Levi, after surviving Hitler's concentration camp was asked how he still could believe in G-d. He said that he made a leap of faith. Is it provable, no. Is it a leap of faith? Yes. I make a leap of faith anytime I believe, whether in someone continuing to love me, in the likeliness of my car passing inspection etc so why is it wrong to take this particular leap?

(in reply to cloudboy)

Post #: 93

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 7:39:38 AM

velvetears

Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

I don't believe in god and he walked up and held out his hand I wouldn't shake it. Anyone with infinite power who created polio and MS deserves nothing but scorn. I used to say as a kid if I found out god really existed I would raise an army to fight he/she/it.

You're assuming God's a micromanager.

That's what people don't understand about God. He doesn't decide who gets polio, or whose children burn to death in a fire, or what mother will drown all her children. He gave us free will. God is in the helping hands of other people as they reach out to us, it's in the generous acts of kindness others show us - these are manifestations of god and that which brings us closer to him. To blame God for everything that goes wrong in ones life is so very ego centered. As cloudboy said - he's not micromanaging everything - where would the free will be in that?

< Message edited by velvetears -- 8/31/2007 7:41:17 AM >

_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to cloudboy)

Post #: 94

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 7:48:14 AM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

I don't believe in god and he walked up and held out his hand I wouldn't shake it. Anyone with infinite power who created polio and MS deserves nothing but scorn. I used to say as a kid if I found out god really existed I would raise an army to fight he/she/it.

You're assuming God's a micromanager.

That's what people don't understand about God. He doesn't decide who gets polio, or whose children burn to death in a fire, or what mother will drown all her children. He gave us free will. God is in the helping hands of other people as they reach out to us, it's in the generous acts of kindness others show us - these are manifestations of god and that which brings us closer to him. To blame God for everything that goes wrong in ones life is so very ego centered. As cloudboy said - he's not micromanaging everything - where would the free will be in that?

According to the bible..God used to be one hands on, nosy fucker. You wanna talk about free will...Sit down and have a conversation with Job. Since the advent of mass media...It seems that burning bushes, angels, turning those who disobey into pillars of salt and handing down stone tablets have kind of diminished in their occurrence.

It's soooo sad..God lost interest... It's a two way street.

_____________________________

(in reply to velvetears)

Post #: 95

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 7:54:47 AM

Bobkgin

Posts: 1335
Joined: 7/28/2007
From: Kawarthas, Ontario, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

I don't believe in god and he walked up and held out his hand I wouldn't shake it. Anyone with infinite power who created polio and MS deserves nothing but scorn. I used to say as a kid if I found out god really existed I would raise an army to fight he/she/it.

You're assuming God's a micromanager.

That's what people don't understand about God. He doesn't decide who gets polio, or whose children burn to death in a fire, or what mother will drown all her children. He gave us free will. God is in the helping hands of other people as they reach out to us, it's in the generous acts of kindness others show us - these are manifestations of god and that which brings us closer to him. To blame God for everything that goes wrong in ones life is so very ego centered. As cloudboy said - he's not micromanaging everything - where would the free will be in that?

We are asked to believe God is omniscient.

If that is true, then the history of the universe and the fate of everything in it is nothing more than a combination shot involving an infinite number of balls.

Thus nothing can occur that wasn't planned for (and intended) by God.

I don't believe in a creator god, because those are the unavoidable truths about such a being.

I prefer to believe in a a living universe that, like any life form, is constantly growing.

_____________________________

When all is said and done, what will you regret?

That you never really lived?

Or there was so much living left to do?

For those interested: pics and poetry have been added to my profile.

(in reply to velvetears)

Post #: 96

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 8:11:08 AM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears
He doesn't decide who gets polio, or whose children burn to death in a fire, or what mother will drown all her children. He gave us free will. God is in the helping hands of other people as they reach out to us, it's in the generous acts of kindness others show us - these are manifestations of god and that which brings us closer to him. To blame God for everything that goes wrong in ones life is so very ego centered. As cloudboy said - he's not micromanaging everything - where would the free will be in that?

Where is the free will people dying in a natural disaster (hurricane or tsunami)? Where is the free will in congenital heart defects and other genetic issues?

_____________________________

(in reply to velvetears)

Post #: 97

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 9:15:27 AM

Aswad

Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobkgin

I think everything bdsm attacks the beliefs of christianity. It would all be considered sacrilege.

Whence do you derive that notion?

Or are you thinking about the praxes of specific churches?

quote:

So I really can't take the position that we should avoid sacrilege seriously: it would mean not doing bdsm (nor poly, nor gblt, etc)

Actually, poly and LGBT are kind of ambiguous.
The OT indicates polygamy was accepted, for instance.
As for LGBT, interpretations on that are still widely debated.

The relevant passages deal with defining the Jewish community, giving it an identity that is seperate from the cultures in the surrounding area, especially the Canaanites, who allowed pretty much any sexual, marital and relationship preferences, including lots of things that are illegal in most countries in the western hemisphere today.

quote:

such as storming a church during service and urinating on the minister, or something of that nature.

Damn, I've wanted to do that about half the times I've been to church. Some of them just drone on and on like some kind of soulless tormentor of lost souls... the hell of eternally uninspired oration. One wonders if they get commission on people leaving the church, or if they just prefer the solitude, or maybe had a lobotomy at some point.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Bobkgin)

Post #: 98

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 9:44:39 AM

Aswad

Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bobkgin

The Flagellists (as a religious sect) no longer exist. They were a Catholic group, and were banned a few centuries ago.

Catholics still practice mortification of the flesh, although they now do it in the form of deprivation. M/s slavery would even qualify as mortification, although I doubt the Catholic church would agree, at least in any way that might reach public ears. Both the current and former popes have written extensively about the virtues of suffering.

quote:

I recall a man in the Phillipines undergoing a form of crucifixion, but that was in religious adoration of Christ, not part of a scene.

What is to say one cannot have a scene in adoration, really? Intercourse between bonded partners has actually been viewed as a sacrament in various interpretations. No reason why one should not heighten that aspect of the experience by adding another element of that sort to it. Imitatio Christi together is hardly disrespectful.

quote:

From my point of view, BDSM is a form of sexual expression, and does not follow the precepts of Christianity.

Not everyone views it as merely a form of sexual expression.

quote:

Paul in his Epistles spoke often of male-dominated families and spoke against women being in control, thus dommes would be banned.

Paul was a misogynist pig, and pissed because Mary got more attention than he did. For all I know, he may just have been annoyed that he didn't get to go down on all fours, but whatever his problem was, he spent more time on politics and personal issues than on matters of faith, at least as soon as he didn't have his mentor/master with him.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to Bobkgin)

Post #: 99

RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes - 8/31/2007 9:58:11 AM

Aswad

Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Religion is the narcissistic belief that one's own thoughts and feelings are universal and/or eternal.

Coming from a very intelligent person, this is very unimaginative. In fact, if you analyze it from an atheist angle, it would be appropriate to analyze many of them in terms of the need for the conformist masses to submit to- and be guided by- others, the human pack instinct with its inherent power dynamic. As for Abrahamic religions, those were at the core of making a cohesive society out of a group of people that had known nothing but slavery for a long time. To say it is limited to narcissism falls short of a full analysis, from any angle.

'Course, I'm just a crazy religious person, so never mind me.

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 100

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: moral north; seeking opinions on religious scenes

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109