• Christian school teacher arrested for alleged sexual assault; more victims suspected
    (archived link)

• Christ the King bookkeeper gets 2 years in prison for embezzling church funds
    (archived link)

• Ex-teacher at Pope John XXIII High School is sentenced to 10 years in prison for taking upskirt photos of students
    (archived link)

• Pakistani religious body declares using VPN is against Islamic law

• Hate pastor renegs on promise to refund tithes

• Priest faces life imprisonment over third child sex offences conviction

• Church of England head resigns over handling of sex abuse scandal
    (archived link)

• Ohio pastor accused of raping a juvenile facing 6 felony counts
    (archived link)

• Televangelist Kenneth Copeland says people who didn’t vote for Trump will hear the names of aborted ‘babies’ for all eternity

   
Previously

  • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    1 month ago

    There is no objective truth. You wanting to project objective truth does not make it more real. Reality is a mystery, and using tools incorrectly to fool yourself into objective truth is a miscarriage of science.

    You’re trying to apply materialism to allegory. Evaluating religion this way is a meaningless argument.

    • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 month ago

      Is the statement that there is no objective truth objectively true? If so, there is some objective truth, and the statement is false. Like I said, it’s a self-defeating claim.

        • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          1 month ago

          What does set theory have to do with absolute truth? And if there is no absolute truth, how can any aspect of set theory be valid?

              • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                2·
                1 month ago

                I can, but I won’t. This is no longer an entertaining use of my time. I’m not going to explain the implications of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem to someone with such a shaky grasp of epistemology. Pearls before swine.

                • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1·
                  1 month ago

                  It’s odd that you won’t explain your epistemology to someone, but you will claim moral/intellectual superiority in not explaining an actually important point after debating them on the hypothetical sentience of the sun for over a day. You can throw all the names of theorems you want at a conversation. but the simple fact is that “there is no absolute truth” is a self-contradictory statement. Any philosophy you build on such a fragile foundation is a non-starter.

                  • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                    2·
                    1 month ago

                    Which is precisely why I’m not going to explain epistemology to someone who has repeatedly demonstrated poor logical methodology.