Theme: Religion

  • Deliver unto any gods…

    “Deliver faith and obedience to any gods compatible with natural law. Deliver Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity to mankind because Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity ARE the natural law.”

    Christianity survives under natural law as does all literature under natural law, in that the parables advocate natural law, despite being stated in language and grammar of myth, instead of the language and grammar of Testimony (law). Deliver faith and obedience to any gods compatible with natural law. Deliver Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity to mankind because Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity ARE the natural law.

  • Deliver unto any gods…

    “Deliver faith and obedience to any gods compatible with natural law. Deliver Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity to mankind because Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity ARE the natural law.”

    Christianity survives under natural law as does all literature under natural law, in that the parables advocate natural law, despite being stated in language and grammar of myth, instead of the language and grammar of Testimony (law). Deliver faith and obedience to any gods compatible with natural law. Deliver Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity to mankind because Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity ARE the natural law.

  • On Intelligent Design: I Support Truthful Speech

    —“Are you saying you support darwanism over Christianity or intelligent design?”—Mark E. Haney

    1 – I cannot falsify evolution, and every single evidence from the fundamental structure of the universe to the imagination of man is a product of a very small number of possibilities in very great permutation, just as limited numbers of sounds, characters, and numbers can be arranged in infinitely complex permutations. 2 – The five rules of christianity are,logically, rationally(incentives), scientifically(empirically) the optimum prisoner’s dilemma (trust building) strategy, and I cannot falsify either or their relation. There is a reason christians are wealthier than competing cults. 3 – Information can only be stored in some memory or other, information stored must be abstracted (generalized) in order to consume less calories and volume that the original matter and its changes in state over time. I cannot falsify that statement – it’s a physical and logical impossibility. As to what I ‘Support’: I support truthful speech. Truthful speech can only consist of what I can testify to. I can only testify to that which is: … – categorically consistent … – logically consistent … – empirically(observably) consistent … – operationally consistent … – rationally consistent … – reciprocally consistent where it is: … – parsimonious … – scope consistent … – and fully accounted … – within stated limits and where … – due diligence has been demonstrated, and where … – one’s statements are warrantied by restitution if one errs. I cannot testify to anything other than. 1. Realism, 2. Naturalism, 3. Operationalism Christianity survives under natural law as does all literature under natural law, in that the parables advocate natural law, despite being stated in language and grammar of myth, instead of the language and grammar of Testimony (law). Deliver faith and obedience to any gods compatible with natural law. Deliver Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity to mankind because Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity ARE the natural law.

    —“The point is, you don’t have to believe in anything supernatural to understand why natural law works. In fact, it hinders you. But as long as we both believe in the natural law, regardless of where it comes from, we can still be allies. I have to have faith in that law to deliver but that’s all. You believe whatever you want but in reality, evolution is the most intelligent design possible.”—Martin Štěpán

  • On Intelligent Design: I Support Truthful Speech

    —“Are you saying you support darwanism over Christianity or intelligent design?”—Mark E. Haney

    1 – I cannot falsify evolution, and every single evidence from the fundamental structure of the universe to the imagination of man is a product of a very small number of possibilities in very great permutation, just as limited numbers of sounds, characters, and numbers can be arranged in infinitely complex permutations. 2 – The five rules of christianity are,logically, rationally(incentives), scientifically(empirically) the optimum prisoner’s dilemma (trust building) strategy, and I cannot falsify either or their relation. There is a reason christians are wealthier than competing cults. 3 – Information can only be stored in some memory or other, information stored must be abstracted (generalized) in order to consume less calories and volume that the original matter and its changes in state over time. I cannot falsify that statement – it’s a physical and logical impossibility. As to what I ‘Support’: I support truthful speech. Truthful speech can only consist of what I can testify to. I can only testify to that which is: … – categorically consistent … – logically consistent … – empirically(observably) consistent … – operationally consistent … – rationally consistent … – reciprocally consistent where it is: … – parsimonious … – scope consistent … – and fully accounted … – within stated limits and where … – due diligence has been demonstrated, and where … – one’s statements are warrantied by restitution if one errs. I cannot testify to anything other than. 1. Realism, 2. Naturalism, 3. Operationalism Christianity survives under natural law as does all literature under natural law, in that the parables advocate natural law, despite being stated in language and grammar of myth, instead of the language and grammar of Testimony (law). Deliver faith and obedience to any gods compatible with natural law. Deliver Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity to mankind because Truth, Duty, and Reciprocity ARE the natural law.

    —“The point is, you don’t have to believe in anything supernatural to understand why natural law works. In fact, it hinders you. But as long as we both believe in the natural law, regardless of where it comes from, we can still be allies. I have to have faith in that law to deliver but that’s all. You believe whatever you want but in reality, evolution is the most intelligent design possible.”—Martin Štěpán

  • Propertarianism Protects Christianity

    Propertarianism Protects Christianity https://ift.tt/2MAZh94


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-24 15:03:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165278446966231041

  • Propertarianism Protects Christianity

    “God doesn’t force us to believe. Why over time people do believe on their own accord when they are ready. He isn’t negating Christianity, he’s using logical terminology in law terms. RECIPROCITY means equal across the board to all including those that don’t believe or do I’m a Christian and I agree with Doolittle’s opinions. He’s speaking truth. Propertarian protects Christianity because it’s compatible with NATURAL LAW.” — Ben Boss

  • Propertarianism Protects Christianity

    “God doesn’t force us to believe. Why over time people do believe on their own accord when they are ready. He isn’t negating Christianity, he’s using logical terminology in law terms. RECIPROCITY means equal across the board to all including those that don’t believe or do I’m a Christian and I agree with Doolittle’s opinions. He’s speaking truth. Propertarian protects Christianity because it’s compatible with NATURAL LAW.” — Ben Boss

  • Mark E. Haney are you saying you support darwanism over Christianity or intellig

    Mark E. Haney are you saying you support darwanism over Christianity or intelligent design?

    1 – I cannot falsify evolution and every single evidence from the fundamental structure of the… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=453761418554087&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-24 06:47:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165153584645844992

  • You aren’t stupid – on the other hand, *belief* in something out of faith, and *

    You aren’t stupid – on the other hand, *belief* in something out of faith, and *arguing* against science with sophism, innumeracy, and pseudoscience is somewhere between stupid and unethical. There is a difference. One does not justify faith. One practices it. One argues science.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-24 03:38:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165106042059022337

    Reply addressees: @Coolish_Breeze @clairlemon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165039194210799617


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165039194210799617

  • I write about this subject quite a bit because there are two origins to pervasiv

    I write about this subject quite a bit because there are two origins to pervasive sophism in western civilization, regardless of field: mathematical idealism, and scriptural interpretation. Both of which stem from the same error.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-24 03:21:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165101703483539456

    Reply addressees: @clairlemon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165101315393036294


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @clairlemon Mathematics is the most simple of the logics, the logic of positional names. The greeks did everything with geometry. There is a good reason. Measurements (real) vs Language (ideal). And stuck with the consequences of treating math as a language – where nonsense can be said.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1165101315393036294


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @clairlemon Mathematics is the most simple of the logics, the logic of positional names. The greeks did everything with geometry. There is a good reason. Measurements (real) vs Language (ideal). And stuck with the consequences of treating math as a language – where nonsense can be said.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1165101315393036294