They are whether you like that or not.
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."
-Matthew 7:21
Pretty sure your savior had a lot to say about judging others.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."
-Matthew 7:15
I’m not as critical of his term as president because I don’t think anyone really voted for him as president. He was the Trump blocker.
I never expected him to be a competent or good president so I never put that expectation on him.
His purpose was to be a transitionary president, keep Trump out of office for those 4 years while he spotlights and elevates the profile of exciting young democrats and guides the discussion towards hope and excitement in the upcoming primary, where a popular progressive candidate could spark a nationwide discussion and get everyone excited about the democrats for 8 more years.
It seemed like everyone understood this when he was elected. I don’t know what happened. I don’t know if it was Biden’s ego, or if his handlers manipulated him to keep a job, but his decision to run again was the utmost betrayal of democracy, singlehandedly decimated any possible democratic victory, and destroyed any chance of a positive legacy.
All he had to do was just go away and his legacy would have been secure.
You cant just keep spinning up new churches to suit your ideal version of god and expect credulity.
You literally set the criteria as “the heaven Biden believes in”. You’re just arguing with yourself.
The heaven Biden believes in:
“Forgive me father for I have sinned, I drone striked an entire region in the middle east to massive amounts of collateral damage and sent billions of dollars in weapons to Israel to be used against Palestinians.”
“Say 3 Hail Marys and one Our Father and you are forgiven.”
If you’re talking OpenEvolve you have to specific put in the tests and expected values for each function for this approach to work.
That is outrageous! It’s unfair!
if I were there would be proof that’s why your example is a false equivalence.
Not necessarily. This is lemmy, you’re on a completely anonymous account. I wouldn’t expect to have any proof.
Maybe you just didn’t get caught yet.
If the Christian God exists, for example, there would be no way of knowing for certain
I was willing to grant you the philosophical God argument, but if you want to evoke the Christian God you’re now making a whole bunch of positive claims.
Why don’t we look at the evolutionary record and see whether all of humanity comes from Adam and Eve or if animals evolved from a common ancestor?
We can look for evidence of a flood, or an exodus and see there is none.
We can track the history of Yahweh, and how he was syncretized with El and Baal from Caananite faiths, and morphed over centuries from a local Storm/war God to the only God.
The early Israelites engaged in polytheistic practices that were common across ancient Semitic religion, because the Israelite religion was a derivative of the Canaanite religion and included a variety of deities from it, including El, Asherah, and Baal. Initially a lesser deity among the Cannanite pantheon, Yahweh in later centuries became conflated with El; Yahweh took on El’s place as head of the pantheon of the Israelite religion, El’s consort Asherah, and El-linked epithets, such as ʾĒl Šadday (אֵל שַׁדַּי), came to be applied to Yahweh alone. Characteristics of other deities, such as Asherah and Baal, were also selectively absorbed in conceptions of Yahweh.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh
We can compare the contradictions between the behavior of the Old Testament God and Jesus to conclude like early Christians such as Marcion of Sinope Yahweh and Christianity are incompatible
Study of the Hebrew Bible, along with received writings circulating in the nascent Church, led Marcion to conclude that many of the teachings of Jesus were incompatible with the actions of Yahweh, characterized as the belligerent god of the Hebrew Bible. Marcion responded by developing a ditheistic system of belief around the year 144.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope
We can compare the Gospels and see where they copied stories from the Iliad/Odyssey.
Odyssey Location Mark Location
Athena descends like a bird 1.319-324 Spirit descends like a dove 2:1-2 Sailors volunteer to follow Athena 2.383-413 Fishermen volunteer to follow Jesus 1:16-20 Nestor’s feast for 4500 men 3.1-68 Jesus’s feast for 5000 men 6:30-44 Menelaus’s wedding feast 4.1-67 Jesus’s feast for 4000 8:1-9 Odysseus enters city behind mules 6.252-261 Jesus enters city on an ass 11:1-11 Alcinous’s prolific figs trees 7.112-121 Jesus curses unprolific fig tree 11:12-14 Blind Demodocus among sailors 8.471-473 Blind man at “House-of-fisherman” 8:22-26 Lotus-eating, forgetful comrades 9.62-107 Forgetful disciples at sea 8:19-21 Polyphemus the cave-dweller 9.105-525 Dangerous demoniac from caves 5:1-20 Aeolus’s bag of winds and gale 10.1-55 Jesus calms winds and sea 4:35-41 Cannibals at the harbor 10.76-136 Hostile Pharisees at the harbor 8:10-13 Following a water carrier to dinner 10.100-116 Following a water carrier to dinner 14:12-16 Circe turns soldiers into swine 10.135-465 Jesus sends demons into swine 5:1-20 Odysseus’s last supper before Hades 10.546-561 Jesus’s last super and Gethsemane 14:32-42 Death of young Elpenor 10.546-560 Flight of naked young man 14:43-52 Blind seer Tiresias 11.90-94 Blind seer Bartimaeus 10:46-52 Death of Agamemnon at a feast 11.409-430 Death of the Baptist at a feast 6:14-29 Burial of Elpenor at dawn 12.1-5 Young man at tomb at dawn 16:1-4 Eurylochus’s vow 12.298-305 Peter’s vow 14:26-31 Eurylochus’s broken vow 12.367-396 Peter’s broken vow 14:66-72 Eumaeus’s Phoenician nurse 15.417-491 Syrophoenician woman 7:24-30 Odysseus’s transfiguration 16.172-301 Jesus’s transfiguration 9:2-13 Suitors plot to kill Telemachus 16.383-385 Vinedressers kill the beloved son 12:1-12 Conspiracy to kill Telemachus 17.182-213 Conspiracy to kill Jesus 14:10-11 Penelope’s hospitality 17.534-547 Generous widow at temple 12:41-42 Irus the beggar 18.1-94 Barabbas the brigand 15:6-15 Telemachus’s amazement at house 19.35-43 Disciples’ amazement at temple 13:1-2 Penelope’s request for a sign 19.102-271 Disciples’ request for a sign 13:3-8 Prophetic oak at Dodona 19.296-307 Prophetic fig tree 13:28-31 Eurycleia washes her master 19.370-575 Woman anoints Jesus 14:3-9 Eurycleia’s recognition of Odysseus 19.474-486 Peter’s recognition of the Messiah 8:27-30 Odysseus slays suitors in his house 22.17-86 Jesus expels merchants from temple 11:15-19 Contested authority over the house 22.221-233 Contested authority over the temple 11:27-33 Odysseus hacks to death evil slave 22.474-477 Bystander slices off a slave’s ear 14:43-5
https://testimonia.pl/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/MacDonald.Mimesis.pdf
Or also where they contradict each other
If you spend enough time focusing on the truth of this you will eventually conclude you cannot prove your belief like they cannot prove theirs so neither side has anything demonstrable.
I don’t think theist Christians would agree with that though. Quoting Tertullian:
We do not worship your gods, because we know that there are no such beings. This, therefore, is what you should do: you should call on us to demonstrate their non-existence, and thereby prove that they have no claim to adoration; for only if your gods were truly so, would there be any obligation to render divine homage to them. And punishment even were due to Christians, if it were made plain that those to whom they refused all worship were indeed divine. But you say, They are gods. We protest and appeal from yourselves to your knowledge; let that judge us; let that condemn us, if it can deny that all these gods of yours were but men.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0301.htm
When it comes to a philosophical creator god I agree with your statement, this view describes agnostic atheism.
The assertion that there is no God cannot be proven as you cannot prove a negative.
Correct, no one argued that.
There assertion that there is a divine entity cannot be logically demonstrated in any valid way logically speaking.
Correct again.
The validity of either claim cannot be tested and thus have the same overall value and it is a matter of which you choose to accept.
Do you really mean that?
If I were to accuse you of something terrible like being a child molester with absolutely zero evidence…
That’s valid? You can deny it, but your denial is of equal value to my accusation right? So if everyone in this comment section chooses to believe you molester children from now on… do you have a problem with that?
The reason I’m an atheist is the same reason I don’t believe you’re a child molester yet. I think there is a burden of proof of evidence that would need to be met before the accusation needs to be taken seriously.
Lmao, k
Software As A Surprise
If the question is things “only” old people say, you have to exclude phrases old people say that were repopularized through media.
“Heavy” (meaning important, grave)
For example this is a really quotable line from Back to the Future, so kids would pick it up.
No one should be told they’re purity testing for criticizing the democrats.
Purity testing would be saying someone can’t be an ally in criticizing the democrats with you because they’re an enemy for voting for them.
Someone put a coin in my hand and said “heads is genocide, tails is genocide in a different way” and I really cared about not doing genocide so I asked “can I choose none” and they said “you can walk away, but then the coin will be flipped randomly”.
If you walked away from that coin flip and left the consequences to chance, I really don’t have a lot of patience hearing you judge me for all the burden and anxiety I put on myself researching which option was worse so I could make the least worst choice.
Walking away seems the easy choice here. You didn’t stop the genocide, you just washed your hands clean of it.
Criticizing me for choosing, instead of being an ally, saying “that was a tough choice, but don’t give up **here’s what we can do next” is useless.
Instead of saying we should stay home and not vote, suggest something we can do. The endless criticizing of powerless people just trying their best in a shitty situation is why you’re being accused of purity testing.
This is the perfect example of the purity test OP was talking about.
Two people who couldn’t be more clear in their comments how disgusted they are by this obvious ongoing genocide, but yet completely powerless to do anything about it.
One person wants to use the little power they have to steer the country as far away from genocide as they can, and the other who sees that the game is rigged and wants no part in the government claiming their consent.
What’s unfortunate is that you’re directed all you anger at each other since neither knows how to direct it at the people in power.
Democrats give Palestinians no better chance of fighting another day, that just give liberals a license to pretend the genocide isn’t happening.
“Democrats” are not a monolith. Criticize the democrats all you want when they deny the genocide, but when we have candidates saying the following, it does feel like you’re being overly pessimistic about what allies you actually do have available to you inside this broken party:
“As we speak, in this moment, 1.1 million innocents in Gaza are at famine’s door,” Ocasio-Cortez said in her speech Friday. “A famine that is being intentionally precipitated through the blocking of food and global humanitarian assistance by leaders in the Israeli government.”
“If you want to know what an unfolding genocide looks like,” the New York Democrat added, “open your eyes.”
genocide is not something you negotiate away.
Genocide is not something you stay at home for and hope it goes away on its own.
You don’t get to claim the ally if all you did was nothing.
OP criticized people who stayed home (choosing to hold on to their purity) instead of voting for the candidates least likely to perpetuate futher suffering.
Going “oh no this trolley problem is so terrible I refuse to even look at the lever” is prioritizing your own moral superiority over the people tied to the tracks.
I believe that’s “whataboutism”?
Yeah that’s exactly what’s happening.
Look at comments above like
may you get the future you are hoping for
A lot of people aren’t interested in learning about AI as it stands today they’re worried about the future.
They see massive corporations trying to replace artists.
If the output is “good” they might just succeed, if the output is “slop” then they can dream of a market solution where consumers band together to look at AI ads/art as lazy and artists get to keep their jobs.
If someone hates AI because of power politics, they’re not trying to speak objectively about it, because that objectivity is perceived to support the tech billionaires who are trying to push AI so hard.
Great answer.
the “somewhere elses” all have their own fucked up problems, like algorithms that optimise for combativeness, and corporate control of various debates
I think keeping this in mind is key. When corporations have full control of these debates we realize maybe we’re wasting our time trying to appeal to their algorithms and should just build a new space without it.
Inherently the new space will be a little smaller and reach less people, but we value that because it gives us a bit more room to speak.
Yea not serious.
Authority means force.
Your dentist does not have the ability, to force you to do anything. They are an “authority” in the sense they know a lot about teeth so we willingly ask them for help.
That is clearly not the same type of authority being discussed in authoritarianism.
Stop comparing Hitler to your dentist.
I think that’s a bit of a false dichotomy.
I never intended to imply you only have to consider this one thing, but I think if a good faith comment exists, it’s one that respects the human on the other side of the screen they’re talking to and assumes good intent.
As human beings in good faith we give the benefit of the doubt and when someone crosses that line well then we do the calculus on how to respond without being a pushover
I would agree with you there are certain bad faith comments out there that aren’t worth responding to in good faith and that’s the scenario OP was trying to point out.
I’m not telling you anything, I simply quoted it. Read the passages.
If you see a contradiction then that’s what your brain is telling yourself.
I’m not going to argue anything. I’m simply going to quote the Bible again.
-Corinthians 5:11-13