You've been lied to all your life.
Everything you thought you knew turned out to be a well crafted lie to keep you from reaching your true potential.
Yet, the one book that has controlled the mind of you and your family for generations.
That book has to be the one true constant through all the lies… Right?
Kek.
And you do?
I'm not the one that's been convinced without proof that a guy sits in the clouds and watches me masturbate…
kek
>You´re commenting on the lectures of Jordan Peterson, right?
Only read the title. Didn't know or care that it was JP.
As if I'm gonna waste 2.5 hours on a lecture about you favourite fantasy character. Let alone one by a pseudo intellectual retard that acts like toddler when confronted with actual logic.
Mf'ing kek.
>No.
Wait and see. You clearly have no idea how bad things really are.
>It´s the first lecture of … 12? So, have fun, kek
Kek. Ain't happening.
>he´s talking about everything but the 'imaginary friend'
I'm using specific framing to mock religiotards.
>trying to make the good book make sence from a scientific psycological perspective
Why though? Why call it God then?
Have you seen his debate with Matt Dillahunty?
Peterson 100% believe in the "imaginary friend" version of God.
He might try to recontextualize it here because he lost the debate, severely, in an attempt to try and save face.
"Nono, this is what I meant aboot God" ← in a smarmy Canadian accent.
If God is just a psychological concept, then why even bother with calling it God?
>Maybe you should listen before claiming to know what he´s saying? Just a thought.
I listened to enough of his BS.
>You jump to conclusions all over the place.
No I don't.
First of, I said "might".
God is either a psychological concept or a "imaginary friend".
I was told the lecture was about anything but God as an "imaginary friend", that leaves only one conclusion.
>You´re obsessed with defining God as either this or that
No, I'm obsessed hypocrisy and the destruction there of.
I don't care about God. You are the ones who claim I should care. And when I challenge that claim, you claim I'm obsessed.
>He doesn´t define God either way
No, obviously. Because that gives him an out.
He's retarded, but educated. He knows the pitfalls.
Saying you believe in something you refuse to define is cowardly.
>Deal with it.
Kek. I've dealt with it. Can you?
>Explain the double slit experiment in quantum physics, or dark energy.
Has nothing to do with God or the existence there of.
Same with Big Bang theory, Theory of Vacuum, Gravity etc.
This is you jumping to a conclusion.
>Then you´ll have my attention.
I clearly have it already…
>I don´t know what God is. A God you can understand is not God.
But you believe it's there and you project qualities onto it. This is hypocritical.
If you have no way of knowing something, it's irrational to believe it.
>there are those concluseion jumping again
No… this was founded speculation… try researching the meaning of the words you use…
I see you follow the JP school of intellectualism. Kek.
>I do?
Yes. Without a doubt.
>the God vs Science argument is therefor invalid.
I never claimed otherwise. It's a false paradigm.
Also, don't conflate "Science"(tm) with the Scientific method.
One dogma vs. another dogma is however, as I said, completely irrelevant to the question of God and the existence there of.
>The double slit experiment shows clearly that things/reality is not what it seems.
Correct.
>So make that you´re starting point: We don´t know shit.
Exactly the point of my first post.
But you know God exists?
>I don´t know what God is
Why call it God then?
What are you even arguing by now?
I never claimed that "Science"(tm) was the full and exhaustive description of the mechanisms in this world.
Disproving "Science"(tm) is completely irrelevant to our conversation.
>Doesn´t mean it´s not real.
Correct. But assuming that it is, is irrational until proper evidence is presented. And even then, with the evidence, it might still be wrong.
>Only shills argue religion and God.
The highest ranking anon has spoken.
I apologize greatly.
Is 10 whiplashes a sufficient punishment, my liege?
>It can never be presented. If there´s a God, it´s beyond our world/reality. Can you show evidence of non-existence?
That is my point.
>You´re simplifying a very complex question.
No, i'm countering the extra-ordinary claim (Claim: A creator God exists) with the necessary requirement of extra-ordinary evidence. The admission that such is impossible to come by, makes the disregard of the claim the only proper action.
>Q is a Bible fag.
He's really not.
But Bible fags will read his posts as they want.
And yes, Q did reference the Bible multiple times but he also stated clearly that he was against dogma.
>"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
>Q
>I can´t rule out God when I don´t know shit, and neither can you.
Except, the idea/claim of a God came from people who don't know shit either. Therefore I can safely rule it out, unless presented evidence to the contrary.
>Optics is everything.
Sadly, in this case, yes.
But I do believe that this movement will evolve once more truth comes to light. And by extension the US in general.
In reality I don't care what they believe I just get fed up with it the same way I get fed up with "LGBTQ+ representation" in media.
This place is not about God it's about saving humanity. Biblefags desperately want to conflate the two to affirm their beliefs.
>If there´s God it beyond our reality/physical world
>It´s like asking you for evidence that you have consciousness. You can´t provide any. None.
Correct. So why would you believe anyone claiming there's a God? They have nothing to show for it.
Anyone claiming there is a god, knowing what you just described, is being wilfully deceptive.
>>20895088 (me)
Wait, i misread and accidentally agreed to something you said that was wrong.
>It´s like asking you for evidence that you have consciousness.
I have evidence of being conscious. My evidence is that I'm typing consciously typing this reply.
>Anyone claiming there´s not a God is being willfully deceptive about quantum physics, dark energy and consciousness.
Wat?
No… the only solution for these mysteries is not God… As I stated earlier, disproving "science"(tm) says nothing about God…