How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

Spin-off from "Dialog on 'Creationists read this' "

Incl. intelligent design, belief in divine creation

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4941  Postby Cito di Pense » Jan 13, 2020 1:46 pm

THWOTH wrote:But JayJay is occupied not by the 'job' of a male lion in that sense


Well, we have job, and we have occupation, and we have vocation (calling)...

JJ has a calling, too, one he's made, but apparently doesn't know the difference between a disconnected line, which is what he's got, and a busy signal.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Lou Kleener
Posts: 28742
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4942  Postby Fenrir » Jan 13, 2020 1:59 pm

Image
Religion: it only fails when you test it.-Thunderf00t.
User avatar
Fenrir
 
Posts: 3427
Male

Country: Australia
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (gs)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4943  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 13, 2020 3:53 pm

Jeebus that's terrifying.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4944  Postby Jayjay4547 » Jan 14, 2020 5:07 am

Spearthrower wrote:
A Google search on “oreopithecus predators”


It's so disappointing to now realize that a lifetime spent studying a field is held in such low regard by some sectors of the population so they think typing some words into Google offers them equal insight and knowledge.


I learned from the knowledgeable German poster susu that Oreopithecus lived in an environment with a well-known species variety, which didn’t include large predators and that when they appeared, Oreopithecus disappeared.

Spearthrower wrote: I mean, those people are ignorant, but that goes without saying as it's why they needed to type those words into Google in the first place.

I used Google as authority for what susu had told me, and it did. Just as Google immediately showed, contra you, that the term “body plan” or “bauplan” is commonly used to distinguish the hominin gestalt. Those Germans again hey.


Spearthrower wrote: As usual, if you spent more than 2 minutes trying to disprove your ideological enemy wrong and sought to learn a little depth, you'd quickly realize that none of your links are remotely comprehensive.

For example, Oreopithecus bambolii may have restricted to the Tusco-Sardinian area (not that we can actually know that), but other Oreopithecines weren't. Similarly, if you spent more time looking into this topic than 1 search on Google, you'd find that the palaeogeography even of this specific region is disputed, for example, palynology studies have shown that the old ideas about swampy forests (we touched on fossilization selection bias in the past) are not supported as there is evidence of flowers associated with open meadows, just as there is evidence of recurring land bridges between islands in the north of Italy (kinda hard to describe the distribution even of O. bambolii in the absence of this fact). You'd also realize that very little is known about the distribution of species even just in this region alone with new fossils turning up all the time.

So what you've done is type some words into a search engine then treated the resulting hits as the sum of knowledge. Perhaps what can be really drawn from this is that the amount of knowledge this actually represents is just suited to your capacity. Had you phrased your search differently, for example, you might have landed on this link instead:

https://www.britannica.com/animal/Oreopithecus

Oreopithecus, extinct genus of primates found as fossils in Late Miocene deposits in East Africa and Early Pliocene deposits in southern Europe (11.6 to 3.6 million years ago).


And then you would have been similarly mislead by an incredibly short paragraph, lacking detail or citations, and written presumably by someone conducting their collation of knowledge in a manner approximately equivalent to yours. This you would either have accepted or rejected based solely on whether it was useful to your argument - I bet you'll bring more skepticism to this sentence in Britannica than you did to the sentence you found in Smithsonian, even though neither of them offer you any means of querying the validity of the idea.


If you had cited a deeper source we might have carried the discussion forward a bit. As it is, what you say just looks to me like a smokescreen. I doubt that you can use ancestors of Australopithcus to disprove Dart’s inference (and claiming support from Darwin) from its bauplan, that it was a weapon user.
User avatar
Jayjay4547
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Jonathan
Posts: 1164
Male

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4945  Postby Jayjay4547 » Jan 14, 2020 5:13 am

THWOTH wrote:
You described 'ideology' there, not the content of a specifically 'atheist ideology'. So the complete 'atheist ideology' presented stands I reckon. If you take issue with that perhaps you could explain your grounds while providing a breviloquent formulation of you own?


Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology, I am trying here to map out its form by describing how it has messed up the human origin story. In post 4895 I argued that Robert’s “The Incredible Unlikeliness of Being” told a story in which relations with other species were hardly mentioned. Crudely put, we created ourselves. I argue that ideologies are grounded on very simple crude concepts. For example, Marxist ideology was based on the simple belief that oppression of the workers was a bad thing and good would inevitably triumph.
THWOTH wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
The job of the male lion in these skirmishes, is to make war and they are evolved as “lion-hearted” fighters.


:lol:

I know. The 'job' of every male is to act as a sperm delivery system. Like most mammals lions leave the 'lion's share' of the work to the females and then just swan in for dinner and, if they can get away with it, a quick bit of sex followed by a nap.


That might be a fashionable modern view but historically the male lion has often been held up as the symbol of fighting courage. Consider that Masai young men traditionally measure themselves against its ferocity. In the British imperial age, lion statues were used to symbolise its dominant power. The Rhodes memorial features 8 huge bronze lions. Perhaps not so many lion statues being cast in Europe nowadays, thank goodness.

If the biological job of the lion is as you describe then nature is very stupid for having permitted some offspring of lionesses to be expensive parasites. But I argue that the creator is clever, and lionesses have produced sons whose job is to settle the hash of hyena.

And if Robert’s scenario is realistic, of hominins picking up sticks and stones to throw at “other predators” to drive them off their kills, then those sticks and the arms that wielded them, would have come under the same strong persistent adaptive forces as forged the male lion.

Edit: "nature" to "the creator"
User avatar
Jayjay4547
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Jonathan
Posts: 1164
Male

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4946  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 14, 2020 5:16 am

I learned from the knowledgeable German poster susu that Oreopithecus lived in an environment with a well-known species variety, which didn’t include large predators


Well, strange as it may be, susu was wrong. There's very limited knowledge about the diversity of species in the region from that time. But do conspicuously ignore the points I made to crow about how you're right.


I used Google as authority for what susu had told me, and it did. Just as Google immediately showed, contra you, that the term “body plan” or “bauplan” is commonly used to distinguish the hominin gestalt. Those Germans again hey.


And squirrels live in Mars because Google says so. You believe what you want to believe. Factually though, you're wrong - talking about afarensis body plan in comparison to modern humans or to baboons is gibberish.


Spearthrower wrote:So what you've done is type some words into a search engine then treated the resulting hits as the sum of knowledge. Perhaps what can be really drawn from this is that the amount of knowledge this actually represents is just suited to your capacity. Had you phrased your search differently, for example, you might have landed on this link instead:

https://www.britannica.com/animal/Oreopithecus

Oreopithecus, extinct genus of primates found as fossils in Late Miocene deposits in East Africa and Early Pliocene deposits in southern Europe (11.6 to 3.6 million years ago).


And then you would have been similarly mislead by an incredibly short paragraph, lacking detail or citations, and written presumably by someone conducting their collation of knowledge in a manner approximately equivalent to yours. This you would either have accepted or rejected based solely on whether it was useful to your argument - I bet you'll bring more skepticism to this sentence in Britannica than you did to the sentence you found in Smithsonian, even though neither of them offer you any means of querying the validity of the idea.

Jayjay4547 wrote:If you had cited a deeper source we might have carried the discussion forward a bit. As it is, what you say just looks to me like a smokescreen.



And you prove exactly my point. It's a smokescreen because you don't want to believe it. If you'd cited it then it would become gospel - even if you were citing it for just 1 word.

You misunderstand scientific knowledge and methodology at its most basic level: you continually seek to confirm your ideas, but you're not interested in anything that disconfirms them.


I doubt that you can use ancestors of Australopithcus to disprove Dart’s inference (and claiming support from Darwin) from its bauplan, that it was a weapon user.


There's no evidence for Dart's idea (even 80 years later), so it's unnecessary to show it wrong - the lack of evidence means it holds no weight whatsoever.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4947  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 14, 2020 5:25 am

Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology,...


Aha! So now it's axiomatic.

The reason you now need it to be axiomatic is because you've failed abysmally to show that it exists.

I don't think I've ever seen someone so dedicated to failure.

This is what obsessive ideologically motivated hostility results in: idiocy.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4948  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 14, 2020 5:26 am

That might be a fashionable modern view but historically the male lion has often been held up as the symbol of fighting courage.


And that's a metaphor, JJ - it's not something actually present in the lion, nor is it the language of Biology.

The reason you rush to engage in poetic nonsense is because you lack the knowledge and ability to engage substantively in any scientific discourse.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4949  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 14, 2020 5:28 am

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/membe ... exp/posts/

Searching susu.exp's posts for 'oreopithecus'

No suitable matches were found.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4950  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 14, 2020 5:42 am

I argued that Robert’s “The Incredible Unlikeliness of Being” told a story in which relations with other species were hardly mentioned.


No.

You argued that is the standard position of all Biologists who don't sing your song - a song you've made up in the absence of anything scientific.

You've tried to contend that's 'atheistic ideology'. You try to contend that anyone who disagrees with your poorly formulated, unevidence wish-thinking is subject to atheistic ideology. You can't support your assertions, so you use this to explain away your claims' manifest defects.

You were suggested to read Robert's book and you leapt to believe that it was going to support your argument - you kind of crowed about it even while obviously in advance of having read it - talk about being desperate to seek confirmation!

I read a Guardian review of that book and ordered a copy. If Roberts discusses (favourably I suppose) the "hypothesis" I get such flak for here, then why am I getting such flak? Anyway it's less a hypothesis than an obvious inference drawn from what has been known for nearly a century about the body plan of our primitive ancestors and the distinctive abilities of us their modern descendants.

Lack of evidence my eye.

There's nothing to stop an atheist from seeing the role that a distinctive habit of our ancestors played in enabling human speech and co-evolution with objects. But it sure has slowed that appreciation and that is material for science-history, assuming that Roberts' "hypothesis" does in fact become established.


i) you hadn't even read it
ii) your confidence was so boosted you immediately elevated your 'hypothesis' to an obvious inference... it's not even a hypothesis, scientifically speaking as you're not basing it on facts, and you're ignoring all the numerous elements contrary to it.
iii) you assume it justifies your belief
iv) you start using all these assumptions to pretend you're hard done by, that others are being irrational etc.
v) you assume that the book furnishes you with evidence you were previously lacking - so confident that it would do so even though it represents an admission on your part that you were lacking evidence.
vi) without even know what Roberts' book contained, you immediately trot out your gibberish claims again as if you'd really expect to hear such nonsense from a professional
vii) you assume that your silly ideas are going to become established showing you just don't understand anything at all about the entire process.


So you then ordered and read the book.

Obviously, it being written by a professional, it did not contain any of the inane mistakes you've made given that it is necessarily constrained by what evidence shows, not motivated by ideological hostility to science as you are. The result being that your cognitive bias kicked in, you immediately placed Roberts into your self-serving paradigm within which everyone must conform to the silly idea you made up wholesale to explain away the inadequacy of support for your position in the professional literature. The lack of value your idea has to notable professionals becomes support - in your mind - for your little crank conspiracy theory.

It's a strawman from the ground up. No one here is in the slightest bit deceived.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4951  Postby Hermit » Jan 14, 2020 8:17 am

Jayjay4547 wrote:I argue that ideologies are grounded on very simple crude concepts. For example, Marxist ideology was based on the simple belief that oppression of the workers was a bad thing and good would inevitably triumph.

And theist ideology is based on the even cruder and simpler concept of the existence of a of an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent creator. Worse, it is fundamentally grounded on a contradiction: Everything must have a cause. God is not caused. The claims theist ideology makes regarding their gods' omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence too is beset by contradictions.

Theist ideology then goes through unceasing mental acrobatics and contortions in order to argue why their ideology is not contradictory. Examples: Ontological arguments are proposed (why the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent creator is a logical necessity). A multitude of ad hoc theories are added to save the claims that god answers prayers, "intelligent design" is perfect, etc.

Worst of all, there is no testable evidence for the various omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent gods that atheist ideologies have proposed to exist over time. Theist ideology even goes so far as to deny the necessity of empirical evidence. The ultimate arbiter of what is true, according to theist ideology, is faith ("the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen") and the vaguely defined "personal experience".

And this theist ideology is the basis of which you, Jayjay4547, argue "how atheist ideology messed up the human origin story". This is truly laughable, made even more laughable by the fact that in all the years you've banged that drum you have never once defined the target of your objections even though you were asked to do so many times.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 2821
Age: 66
Male

Country: Here
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4952  Postby Cito di Pense » Jan 14, 2020 8:53 am

Hermit wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:I argue that ideologies are grounded on very simple crude concepts. For example, Marxist ideology was based on the simple belief that oppression of the workers was a bad thing and good would inevitably triumph.


And theist ideology is based on


Hold on: You're not responding to what you have just quoted. I am certainly not judging this as an error of any kind: It may be the appropriate way to carry on a conversation with JJ, who also no longer responds directly to any remarks made to him, unless it is to complain about incivility. JJ is incapable of going head to head in such conversations, and has been incapable, all along. He just declines to demonstrate it so explicitly any more. Every so often he does say something a bit specific, in this case, about Marxism, and I tend to think you have the tools (if not the energy) to correct JJ on this point.

I personally don't agree that Marxist ideology can be summarized in the way JJ has attempted to do, but I'm also not about to argue with JJ about that. He's no more interested in the details of Marxist ideology than he is in evolutionary theory, but he was asked to articulate what he means by "ideology" and has not done so, except to give the opinion that it's "crude". There's also not much chance that JJ is going to discuss theology with any more attention to detail than he does with any other topic he brings up. Ironically, I think there is at least a shred of wisdom in any reluctance to discuss theology in detail.

You have seen JJ's current strategy for carrying on a "conversation" about any topic that comes up, whether it is Marxism or evolutionary theory or whatever else comes up. It may be that his strategy has shifted from what it once was, due to the hammering JJ has taken whenever he tries to give an account that can be addressed factually.

I think it is probably wise to be wary of this whenever responding to something JJ has written. Really, all that is taking place any more is that JJ writes something that looks like it might require a response, and somebody responds to it, or writes something that looks like a response, but is not. I honestly have no ideas about how to proceed from here unless it is to ask JJ to clarify what he's written. Eventually you may tempt him to make a statement that can be addressed with facts rather than opinions. Claiming that there is an atheist ideology is simply JJ's opinion. I wonder what would happen if I pretended to agree with his opinion about anything. Would he detect the pretense?
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Lou Kleener
Posts: 28742
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4953  Postby Hermit » Jan 14, 2020 9:40 am

Cito di Pense wrote:
Hermit wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:I argue that ideologies are grounded on very simple crude concepts. For example, Marxist ideology was based on the simple belief that oppression of the workers was a bad thing and good would inevitably triumph.

And theist ideology is based on

Hold on: You're not responding to what you have just quoted.

You are correct. In so far as I have not commented on JJ's take on Marxist ideology at all, I have not replied to the excerpt I quoted. I seized on his description of Marxist ideology as "grounded on very simple crude concepts" instead, only to use it as a hook to argue that theist ideology does not even rise to the level of being simple and crude. I argued that it is an unmitigated, contradiction-ridden clusterfuck right from its outset. Then I went on to comment why theist ideology is a heap of unadulterated nonsense in its entirety.

I think I made a good fist of defining, at least in general terms, theist ideology, and the frequent mention of the term "theist ideology" is intentional.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 2821
Age: 66
Male

Country: Here
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4954  Postby Cito di Pense » Jan 14, 2020 10:25 am

Hermit wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
Hermit wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:I argue that ideologies are grounded on very simple crude concepts. For example, Marxist ideology was based on the simple belief that oppression of the workers was a bad thing and good would inevitably triumph.

And theist ideology is based on

Hold on: You're not responding to what you have just quoted.

You are correct. In so far as I have not commented on JJ's take on Marxist ideology at all, I have not replied to the excerpt I quoted. I seized on his description of Marxist ideology as "grounded on very simple crude concepts" instead, only to use it as a hook to argue that theist ideology does not even rise to the level of being simple and crude. I argued that it is an unmitigated, contradiction-ridden clusterfuck right from its outset. Then I went on to comment why theist ideology is a heap of unadulterated nonsense in its entirety.

I think I made a good fist of defining, at least in general terms, theist ideology, and the frequent mention of the term "theist ideology" is intentional.


Fair enough. It looks to me as if what you focused on (in what I quoted from, above) is conventional Abrahamic monotheology. This is likely the starting point for JJ's creationism, but he's seen what happens when people start critiquing conventional Abrahamic monotheology and its internal contradictions. You'd never get JJ to admit that his "biomic creationism" is rooted in conventional Abrahamic monotheology, but he does bang on quite a lot about "something greater than ourselves". I don't know where JJ thinks that gets us. "We" (as humans) are obviously embedded in a physical universe, but this is not what JJ desires to bring in with "greater".

JJ's conventional religious practices and background are present, even if we do not speak of them often. It's arguably a way to cut to the chase as far as you are concerned. You and I both understand that the aim of all this is to engender respecting of this "reverence for something greater than ourselves" notion he's expressing. You won't ever hear JJ say "reverence", because he's trying to embody it, and you won't ever hear JJ seriously offer anything like conventional Abrahamic monotheology, or even a critique of it. Critique is as far beyond JJ's capabilities as anything else he's tried since giving up surveying, and that includes articulating anything that "atheist ideology" might entail besides lack of respect directed toward theist tripe.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Lou Kleener
Posts: 28742
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4955  Postby felltoearth » Jan 14, 2020 11:24 am

Jayjay4547 wrote:
Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology

This isn’t given anywhere except your head.
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 12149
Age: 52

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4956  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 14, 2020 11:29 am

Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology, then my claim that there is a self-serving atheist ideology is established.

QED motherfuckers!
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 25787
Age: 43
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4957  Postby Fallible » Jan 14, 2020 11:41 am

Jayjay4547 wrote:
THWOTH wrote:
You described 'ideology' there, not the content of a specifically 'atheist ideology'. So the complete 'atheist ideology' presented stands I reckon. If you take issue with that perhaps you could explain your grounds while providing a breviloquent formulation of you own?


Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology,


You can only be trolling at this stage.
Sorry that you think you had it rough in the first world.
You ought to get out of that sooner than later.
Knowledge has turned into a trap; you have to slow down.
Get out of your head and spend less time alone.
User avatar
Fallible
RS Donator
 
Name: Alice Pooper
Posts: 49780
Age: 46
Female

Country: Engerland na na
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4958  Postby Hermit » Jan 14, 2020 12:15 pm

Jayjay4547 wrote:Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology...

...the question arises in what way a theist ideology is not equally self-serving.
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 2821
Age: 66
Male

Country: Here
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4959  Postby Cito di Pense » Jan 14, 2020 1:42 pm

Hermit wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology...

...the question arises in what way a theist ideology is not equally self-serving.


What ideology is not self-serving? Altruism? Perish the thought.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Lou Kleener
Posts: 28742
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: How atheist ideology messed up the human origin story

#4960  Postby Hermit » Jan 14, 2020 2:55 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
Hermit wrote:
Jayjay4547 wrote:Given that there is a self-serving atheist ideology...

...the question arises in what way a theist ideology is not equally self-serving.

What ideology is not self-serving? Altruism? Perish the thought.

Are you, of all people, equating theist ideologies with altruism now?
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 2821
Age: 66
Male

Country: Here
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest

cron