I don’t know why you feel the need to create a wall of text. Well I have an idea.
I honestly don't have a clue what you are saying. Common sense - touch, smell, sight, sound, taste are the five common senses - common to most people on this planet.
By “common sense” I meant common belief. Go back and look at the context. It’s #66.
The truth today that secular thinking is rising is not the same as the truth 50 years ago that secular thinking was declining. Common Sense provides at times a basis for truth. If I see water falling out of the sky, it may well provide the truth - that it is raining. Of course there might be other reasons water is falling out of the sky, but the common sense notion that most people would recognize would accord to this the basis of truth.
Truth is not the same as common sense. Yet some common sense notions provide us with a basis of truth.
Can common sense be based on truth? I suppose so. God is truth. God created the world. God created the senses. Senses therefore are based on truth.
The usage of belief in God is really quite an unhelpful phrase. What does belief mean? The Bible says that Satan and his demons believe in God. Yet this belief is not the means of their salvation. I actually think EVERY PERSON is hardwired with assumption that God is true. People naturally understand God from the moment they are conceived. In fact I truly opine that to choose not to believe God is irrational per se.
I’m not arguing about the five senses. It’s almost as if you’re trying to misconstrue my positions. I’m not going to argue against a premise you falsely assumed.
True is actually just being in accord with the measuring stick or tool. The truth in one sense cannot change. But truth is more than just a random fact thrown out to prove a point.
I roughly agree.
Why is being gay a problem?
I was using it comedically. Plus Abrahamic religions have traditionally had a problem with it.
This is what you were taught. We can be taught things in error. Einstein would attest to that. Yet, somethings we are taught are correct.
And how do we find out they’re correct? Can you give me something correct that I wouldn’t agree with you on?
Your dragon is a matter for you. If you choose to listen to this dragon, what is it to do with me. I suspect you listen to lots of things I might think are silly. Does that make all of them magical and superstitious? You might listen to music. I think that is a waste of time unless it is by someone who is proficient at it.
It seems to me you’re downplaying psychosis.
You might like to listen to Donald Trump. I have never met him. I have only seen him on videos. He seems pretty out there. Perhaps he is simply a fake persona. Should I choose to believe he is fake?
Much about him as a politician I would say is fake, unless he bizarrely changed many of his positions as a 70-80 year old.
I could come to your garage and ask you to show me your dragon. Are you the only one to be able to see it?
He’s invisible. But he’s still 100% there.
I am sticking to context. You are suggesting to me that your dragon in your garage is just as real for you as God is to me. I disagree. For instance - we both know you are producing this figment of imagination as a tool to demonstrate that god is also just imagination. The difficulty of course is we both know your dragon is a figment. In relation to God, you might think that of God but I don't hold that view at all. The comparison simply does not hold water.
For the sake of argument, I whole heartedly believe the dragon is real.
I in real life do pray to God. I also worship God. I have a book - which I understand through sound study and research and logical thinking to be God's words. I have an entire worldview - a comprehensive worldview tied up with God. This is very different to a dragon you have intentionally invented to try and prove God is in the same league. It really is comparing apples with oranges.
If you’re an atheist against the belief of my dragon, would that mean you’re agnostic with other religions? For example Hinduism is much older than Christianity with a rich culture.
I understand your sentiment - don't misunderstand me. I often use similar thoughts of argument but in the reverse direction. And with other religions. But to be perfectly honest, the way to make someone doubt the existence of God is much more complex than telling me you have dragon in your garage and that he is preventing you from murdering people, raping people, and from being gay.
God does not prevent me from murdering people. He does not prevent me from raping people. He does not prevent me from being gay. I do say that but for my belief in God I could do all of those things. I do say that but for this morality that flows from God and his theology, that I would just live for myself. The fact is - if God does not exist - then there are no eternal implications for me. And there are no historical ones either save for whatever this world throws at me.
Many people from many religions use that argumentation against atheists. Personally I find it childish. We’re a species that’s about 300,000 years old. We evolved to do good. How we interpret good is a different matter. Religion was a way for an uneducated community to be on the same page, especially at scale. But now societies have educated populaces with laws that are easily enforceable compared to a few thousand years ago.
If God does not exist - then truth is whatever I want it to be. Facts might remain facts. But facts then just become a description of life that I can agree with or try and change if I wanted too.
That’s the spirit. if It was the truth that you didn’t know a particular skill, but now you do, then all the power to you.
God has provided the world with a correct way to live. If we don't choose to live that way - then that inevitably means we will stuff up.
Did the christian God give other religions instructions on how to live too? Many of those instruction I bet you would disagree with. Even within Christianity.
If we disregard his laws to not kill people - then life would be very messy. Yet if God did not exist, what is the reason not to kill?
firstly, most people don’t kill purely indiscriminately. Secondly, we are community oriented. There are countless repercussions, not just to yourself, but to your loved ones.
Does it not become the survival of the fittest?
Survival of the fittest means the best to adapt. Again, humans adapted to be community oriented, that’s how we best survived.
Don't I at that stage get to determine who lives and who dies?
At what cost?
Of course there are always going to be bigger and stronger people than me. I naturally am going to make sure I don't annoy them. To make people stop believing in God, you need to dig much deeper than you are. This is because God is real.
Societies exist regardless of your god.