Howdy Guest!  / Create an account
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
God’s real modern name is Gap. So says religions and science.
God’s real modern name is Gap. So says religions and science.
Have all free thinkers and the religious settled for a Scientific and divine God of the Gaps?
Religions are now recognizing evolution as part of their God of the Gaps ideologies. Science seems to fail to recognize their own God of the multiverse Gaps, before the Big Bang, where their laws break down.
Religions are here to stay, however; so is science. Religions will just have to learn to live with this.
Governments and the secular world, which have to act in a non-believer way, --- separate of church and state, --- have also had science cast much doubt about the efficacy and morality of all the Gods.
Thanks to all the Gods for our Socio-democratic secular legal systems which puts all theistic laws to shame.
A human created ideology, secular law, is proving itself to be better overall than what all the Gods offer us. That is why even the religious follow the secular and not the theistic law.
Humankind is the God of the Gap. Humans have filled the Gap, and God is best defined as a human being. Do you agree or as Jesus asked, have ye forgotten that ye are Gods?
We are all driven by our instinct to be the fittest human beings possible. We do so, through laws and rules of conduct which are all man made.  God is redundant and remains a drain on the progress of our civilizing ourselves.
We all have the same God of the Gaps. So why are we fighting?
The God of the Gaps isn't an ideology, Gnostic. An ideology is a collection of values and principles that coalesce to form a system of values and ideas that imprints subjectivity towards morality. It tends to affect morality from a manner that directly impacts public policy.

The God of the Gaps is a logical fallacy, where the lack of evidence is proof of the existence of a concept or being, in this case a "genocidal son murdering God like Yahweh".

Logical thinkers do not accept the proposal of the God of the Gaps theory. However, we also do not accept the inverse that is implied by calling out its logical fallacy. That is to say, a lack of evidence disproves the existence of a "genocidal son murdering God like Yahweh."

Whether or not religion or science "stay" is beside the point. The point that must be made is that there are two realms being contested here. Science's territory is that of the empirical, and it ought not venture too far outside of what can be empirically proven. Science has been operating in bad-faith, in regards to religion, as it crosses its operational line and ends up falling into conjecture.

On the other hand, religion and spirituality have no business trying to exist within the realm of science. There is no empirical quality to such an existence, and to say that people's beliefs are quantified is folly.

As a consequence of this distinction, science has no say over matters of morality, either. Your claim that "science cast much doubt about the efficacy and morality of all the Gods" is unfounded and illogical. It has attempted to operate beyond its mandate, on this matter, and has embarrassed itself greatly.

As for your claim that secular law is proving itself to be better overall, it comes down to a matter of the times. Perhaps late history to the present is best run by secular laws, but that was not always the case. The only reason it can operate effectively is because of objectivity. Back in ancient times, objectivity was hard to come by, with how little knowledge everyone had. You cannot develop reason without knowledge. Thus, the use of texts, such as the Bible, were mandated in order to halt the spread of diseases, infections, and to control the political motivations of those states who were most militaristic.

If you took secular law to back then, it would fail miserably. There is a time and a place for every type of ideology.
"There is a time and a place for every type of ideology."

When and where is a slave holding ideology appropriate?

When is the ideology of the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few ever wrong?

In a purely instrumental sense, the slave-holding ideology was most successful in times of booming industry. When man-power was needed to create great works, was it the contractor that slaved away in the heat? No. The pyramids were built by slaves. Chinese dynasties were built and maintained by slaves. The industrial revolution was given wings to fly, on the backs of slaves. It was extremely useful, at times similar to those.

Was that moral? No. By objective moral standards, it was not moral in the slightest. Why then did it happen? Because there was a time and place, where the instrumental value of the ideology far outweighed the moral consequences, in the people of the time's minds.

The ideology of the needs of the many is almost always wrong. The ideal itself is rooted in the same instrumental logic that slave-holding is. It completely disregards the agency of the individual, suppressing the few's voices while giving certain majorities license to oppress them. Living your life off of such an ideology is not desirable, as that is how you put people in corners they are justified to kill in order to get out of.
We are corrupting our true divine selves and pneuma through subjective fictional creations and perceived realities spawning from this imperfect corrupt material plane. Mainstream Science is a biggest example of Deception and falsehood there is, their theories are flawed and they cant fill in their discrepancies and gaps which is truthuly mentioned by Enemy No.1, according to mainstream nihilistic science Apparently there was "nothing" before the big bang which already implies a "thing" yet there must of been something to have activated the event in order for it to take place, what was it? it is the unexplainable and the unknown. something the mainstream scientific culture likes to avoid and sweep under the carpet of corruption and deception. Nihilistic and Darwinistic ideologies are just as illogical and deceptive as the religious ideologies they criticise.

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Talk Paranormal Forum


              Quick Links

              User Links


  • ...
  • ...
  • ...
  • ...