You literally can't figure out why people care about the health of other people. You have to ask me why I do. You go through the motions of being nice because your pastor told you to, but underneath all that it's just vampire blackness.

I know why people care about the well-being of other people.

It's because all people are made in the image of God, and God's moral law are written on our hearts. (See Romans 2).

Liar.

Liar.

While I don't agree that I am "nutso", what (if anything) is wrong with being fruitier than a nutcake?

What, if anything, is wrong with being insane?

Who specifically am I "looking down on?". Please cite a post of mine as an example.

I do not rebuff good science.

Please prove that my views are hypocritical and corrupt.

Are those bad things? If so, why?

.

Who, specifically, have I "judged" or "hell shamed? Please cite a specific post where I did either of those things. Thanks.

Who is my pastor, TrollyLiar?

If I read a poem, the only way I can know for certain what the true meaning of the poem is to ask it's author. And, even then, I could only know that his or her explanation was the true meaning of the poem if I knew s/he was being truthful.

Likewise, we humans can only know our true meaning (or purpose) if either: a)our Creator reveals to us what that meaning is, or b) our Creator gives us the capacity to recognize our purpose on our own.

A discussion can be had about whether or not our Creator has, in fact, given us the capacity to learn what that meaning/purpose is.




I can at least somewhat plausibly be accused of being a lot of things*, but I don't believe the accusation of me being a nihilist is one of those things.

*"Self-important buffoon" is on the table, for example.

You keep pushing these parallels between a piece of art or literature and the universe, not only claiming that because one had a creator then so must the other, but now also claiming that only the creator can tell us its true meaning. I see no reason whatsoever why the analogy is valid.

lol, you're a creationist who's spreading uncertainty about vaccine safety.

If at least some of the surveys are accurate, up to 50% of health care workers are concerned about the safety of the Covid vaccines.

I don't recall questioning the safety of vaccines in general (at least in this Forum).

Do you agree that, in general, the only way to KNOW why something was created, is to be told the reason by the actual creator of that thing?

No. And if you think about it for 5 minutes, you'll understand why thinking that is pretty ridiculous. But the general point is that the logic "thing x was created by a creator ergo all things were created by a creator" is fallacious on its face.

I agree your Strawman Argument is fallacious on its face. Please show a post in ANY thread or Forum where I advanced your Strawman Argument.

As a logician, I understand that one cannot validly deduce a universal from a particular.

Now that I think about it, it was probably nohands who was trotting out the tired tropes about how a watch has a watch-maker therefore the universe has a universe-maker, but I can't be bothered to go look for it.

I'm sure a troll such as yourself would indeed find fact-checking your own claims a bother.

The writer can really only tell you what they were thinking/what they think motivated them and possibly give you their interpretation/what they intended imo. But that doesn't always account for every possibility. We're still limited in some ways even as the 'creator'. Once the art is made and you cut it loose it's its own separate thing--and people often find other meanings the orig. person missed or whatever and even in their motivations. Many artists are even reluctant to give up anything at all in that regard and tell you you're on your own figuring it out gl Others are even reluctant to take credit for the initial motivation--and describe it more like channeling or plugging into something and they're just the antenna or whatever although I think they get over it a little when it's like a hit song and there's a pile of loot attached

Well said.

It's a pretty bad analogy if he's trying to illustrate why he believes his idea of God is the correct and only idea of God.

Poetry and art in general is always open to the interpretation of the viewer.
That's what makes it 'art' instead of 'prose' or a poem instead of a text book.

LT presents The Bible as a text book then compares it to poetry that needs the author's cliff notes to be understood. Sloppy work.

I guess someone hasn’t read Death Of The Author.

You didn't respond to my observation.
You tried to duck it and change the subject.

Why does human life mean nothing if your precise idea of God is incorrect ?

The French are godless.

I can better respond to your question if you could please tell me what you mean by "my precise idea of God."

I believe that God is a precondition for transcendent meaning. Judaism, Islam, Christianity, and Mormonism could each, in principle, provide that meaning.

The key common element for each of the above religions is that each has a Revelatory Epistemology.

You'd have to tell me what your precise idea of God is, but when Trolly implied evolution helps with the science of disease prevention you went on a bit of a tirade like you do when someone talks about the world in a way that you disagree with.


I think you just gave a fairly precise idea though. And there's no reason to assume that someone with different ideas must be materialistic and/or nihilistic.

For example, a buddhist would have no reason not to work hard to help humanity ease suffering, and can easily believe in science and evolution.



"I believe that God is a precondition for transcendent meaning."

This is most likely circular. Which is normally what it comes down to so....gg.

Since Trolly is...well, a troll, I didn't make a connection between his evolution comment being directly relevant to the vaccine discussion. If that was his point, he is welcome to make that point explicit if he so chooses.



Any worldview that has no putative Absolute and Universal ultimate standard is nihilistic. Nothing can be known for certain without an Absolute, Universal and Unchanging standard.


Agreed.





Tautological or circular?

Noted.

Meh. We don't know much for certain and life goes on.
That's a stretch you're making right there.


If Christians actually believed they were going to Heaven for eternity and life was just a short, unpleasant layover, they'd be nihilistic and not inclined to worry about the betterment of humanity.

Fortunately most 'people of faith' are deluded about the amount of faith they actually have and won't act in a logical way regarding their beliefs. They act according to their instincts instead, which are based on the feeling that life has some meaning even if we don't understand it all the time.


Besides, you only need an absolute standard if God is going to judge you on it. If that's not the system in play you don't need absolutes. At least not absolutes that humans need to comprehend.



Circular. If transcendent implies a God that is separate from the universe.



.[/QUOTE]