Hope for Vegans in Jesus

There are arguments ad infinitum about God and religion. Each person makes his/her choice.

Since I choose life, I choose God. It is actually surprising to me that there seem to be so many vegans who choose to believe that this earth is all there is and life ends at death. Sad, really.
 
There are arguments ad infinitum about God and religion. Each person makes his/her choice.

Since I choose life, I choose God. It is actually surprising to me that there seem to be so many vegans who choose to believe that this earth is all there is and life ends at death. Sad, really.
Those vegans you speak of don’t consider it sad. They simply have no use for religion.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: silva and PTree15
Check out this webpage: Satan and the Corruption of Nature: Seven Arguments - Greg Boyd - ReKnew

God gives His creations freedom and sometimes they do evil.
The holy books of the major religions glorify war, murder, animal sacrifice and war. Many of the interpretations promote hatred to people of other faiths. If this literature is truly the word of God, it certainly seems he wants us to be the way we are.

I think that way about Marxists.
Horrible things were done in the name of Marxists and the greater socialist good, but equally horrible things were done for other reasons. Plenty of terrible things were and still are being done in the name of religions, countries or for no reason at all. It seems like humans like to follow evil leaders and maybe the problem is not in communism after all.

PS. don't get me wrong, I am a hedge fund manager, so I am definitely on the side of free markets and capitalism

Maybe atheism is the delusion:
Very contrived video, though it's just another irreducible complexity argument. Math is, indeed, beautiful because it is a common language to describe the universe around us. However, there is nothing magical about math, even at the level of the axioms. We can (and do) challenge any of the underlying assumptions and create a totally different flavor of math. There are non-Euclidean geometries out there, for example, invented because people believe that parallel lines converge or diverge asymptotically.

Math works because we have invented it to describe the world around us and kept extending it. It started with very practical tasks like counting goods or measuring areas. Thats what great Greek and Roman mathematicians are known for. As we continued to learn about the physical world, we have invented tools to deal with more complex problems. For example, Newton invented calculus to help himself modeling the laws of mechanics which are largely certain. Once we have reached for less certain problems like movement of molecules in gas or liquid, stochastic calculus was invented by various people, from Bernoulli to Brown to Ito. Even things that do not appear in real world, like N-dimensional geometry is actually pretty useful for modeling specific things.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: Brian W and silva
There are arguments ad infinitum about God and religion. Each person makes his/her choice.

Since I choose life, I choose God. It is actually surprising to me that there seem to be so many vegans who choose to believe that this earth is all there is and life ends at death. Sad, really.
Say what? How does "life" or "death" relate to believing in all mighty dictator?
My lack of knowledge about what happens after this life of mine is the same as how the weather is on the other side of the earth!
 
Those vegans you speak of don’t consider it sad. They simply have no use for religion.
Do you automatically discount something after death? And if so, how do you feel it relates to not being in a creator?
I don't find the correlation
 
The holy books of the major religions glorify war, murder, animal sacrifice and war. Many of the interpretations promote hatred to people of other faiths. If this literature is truly the word of God, it certainly seems he wants us to be the way we are.


Horrible things were done in the name of Marxists and the greater socialist good, but equally horrible things were done for other reasons. Plenty of terrible things were and still are being done in the name of religions, countries or for no reason at all. It seems like humans like to follow evil leaders and maybe the problem is not in communism after all.

PS. don't get me wrong, I am a hedge fund manager, so I am definitely on the side of free markets and capitalism


Very contrived video, though it's just another irreducible complexity argument. Math is, indeed, beautiful because it is a common language to describe the universe around us. However, there is nothing magical about math, even at the level of the axioms. We can (and do) challenge any of the underlying assumptions and create a totally different flavor of math. There are non-Euclidean geometries out there, for example, invented because people believe that parallel lines converge or diverge asymptotically.

Math works because we have invented it to describe the world around us and kept extending it. It started with very practical tasks like counting goods or measuring areas. Thats what great Greek and Roman mathematicians are known for. As we continued to learn about the physical world, we have invented tools to deal with more complex problems. For example, Newton invented calculus to help himself modeling the laws of mechanics which are largely certain. Once we have reached for less certain problems like movement of molecules in gas or liquid, stochastic calculus was invented by various people, from Bernoulli to Brown to Ito. Even things that do not appear in real world, like N-dimensional geometry is actually pretty useful for modeling specific things.
The unholy books of major atheist thinkers like Nietzsche and Marx glorify war and tyranny and hatred. Atheist thinkers like Ayn Rand and Schopenhauer are not always so inspiring. And some atheist activists have hated Muslims and loved eugenics. I don’t think the message of Jesus was so bad: kindness and forgiveness are pretty good, aren’t they?

I see you think Math was invented rather than discovered. I disagree. When 20th century physics progressed beyond Newton did calculus become invalid?

Check out the video:

 
When 20th century physics progressed beyond Newton did calculus become invalid?
Do the old words stop describing old things once we invent new words to describe new things? However, very accurate measurements of the precession of the planet Mercury necessitated an overhaul of Newton's theory of gravity in the form of Einstein's general relativity.

The whole "math is invented vs discovered" argument is centuries old and it it's far from binary. Many prominent mathematicians and physicists (Einstein, Hilbert and Cantor, to name a few) thought that math an invented set of tools and it seems that most practitioners hold similar beliefs. The reality is that mathematics is probably both invented and discovered, in a very weird way. First, we invent mathematical concepts by way of abstracting elements from the world around us. We come up with conceptualizations about shapes, lines, sets, groups, and so forth, either for some specific purpose or simply for fun. They then go on to discover the connections among those concepts. This iteration of invention and discovery is man-made, so our mathematical concepts are ultimately based on our perceptions and the mental pictures we can conjure. One would imagine, for example, should we live in a perfectly continuous world would not have invented natural numbers early on but instead relied on some sort of continuous mathematics for daily use.

When a tennis ball machine shoots out balls, you can use the natural numbers 1, 2, 3, and so on, to describe the flux of balls. When firefighters use a hose, however, they must invoke other concepts, such as volume or weight, to render a meaningful description of the stream. So, too, when distinct subatomic particles collide in a particle accelerator, physicists turn to measures such as energy and momentum and not to the end number of particles, which would reveal only partial information about how the original particles collided because additional particles can be created in the process.
It's evolutionary, too - over time only the best models survive. Failed models, (like Descartes vortices of cosmic matter) die in their infancy or get disproven later. In contrast, successful models evolve as new information becomes available and stick around - the area of a circle is as true today as it was two centuries before.

Whats incredible is that mathematicians sometimes develop entire fields of study with no practical application in mind, and yet decades, even centuries, later physicists discover that these very branches make sense of their observations. Galois, for example, developed group theory in the early 1800s for the sole purpose of determining the solvability of polynomial equations. The general idea is that groups are algebraic structures made up of sets of objects (say, the integers) united under some operation (for instance, addition) that obey specific rules (among them the existence of an identity element such as 0, which, when added to any integer, gives back that same integer). In 20th-century physics, this rather abstract field turned out to be the most fruitful way of categorizing elementary particles. There are plenty of other examples like that, topology and number theory to name the few.

Anyway, while it's fun to discuss mathematics and it's origins, I can't imagine someone believing or not believing in God because of the effectiveness of mathematics. What belief really boils down to is an emotional choice which is made relatively early on in life. Every argument is usually a justification of that choice. Some people are distrustful of anything they have not seen and they turn out like me. Some people turn out like you. This said, if being religious makes you more likely to make ethical choices, I am all for you being religious.
 
Do the old words stop describing old things once we invent new words to describe new things? However, very accurate measurements of the precession of the planet Mercury necessitated an overhaul of Newton's theory of gravity in the form of Einstein's general relativity.

The whole "math is invented vs discovered" argument is centuries old and it it's far from binary. Many prominent mathematicians and physicists (Einstein, Hilbert and Cantor, to name a few) thought that math an invented set of tools and it seems that most practitioners hold similar beliefs. The reality is that mathematics is probably both invented and discovered, in a very weird way. First, we invent mathematical concepts by way of abstracting elements from the world around us. We come up with conceptualizations about shapes, lines, sets, groups, and so forth, either for some specific purpose or simply for fun. They then go on to discover the connections among those concepts. This iteration of invention and discovery is man-made, so our mathematical concepts are ultimately based on our perceptions and the mental pictures we can conjure. One would imagine, for example, should we live in a perfectly continuous world would not have invented natural numbers early on but instead relied on some sort of continuous mathematics for daily use.

When a tennis ball machine shoots out balls, you can use the natural numbers 1, 2, 3, and so on, to describe the flux of balls. When firefighters use a hose, however, they must invoke other concepts, such as volume or weight, to render a meaningful description of the stream. So, too, when distinct subatomic particles collide in a particle accelerator, physicists turn to measures such as energy and momentum and not to the end number of particles, which would reveal only partial information about how the original particles collided because additional particles can be created in the process.
It's evolutionary, too - over time only the best models survive. Failed models, (like Descartes vortices of cosmic matter) die in their infancy or get disproven later. In contrast, successful models evolve as new information becomes available and stick around - the area of a circle is as true today as it was two centuries before.

Whats incredible is that mathematicians sometimes develop entire fields of study with no practical application in mind, and yet decades, even centuries, later physicists discover that these very branches make sense of their observations. Galois, for example, developed group theory in the early 1800s for the sole purpose of determining the solvability of polynomial equations. The general idea is that groups are algebraic structures made up of sets of objects (say, the integers) united under some operation (for instance, addition) that obey specific rules (among them the existence of an identity element such as 0, which, when added to any integer, gives back that same integer). In 20th-century physics, this rather abstract field turned out to be the most fruitful way of categorizing elementary particles. There are plenty of other examples like that, topology and number theory to name the few.

Anyway, while it's fun to discuss mathematics and it's origins, I can't imagine someone believing or not believing in God because of the effectiveness of mathematics. What belief really boils down to is an emotional choice which is made relatively early on in life. Every argument is usually a justification of that choice. Some people are distrustful of anything they have not seen and they turn out like me. Some people turn out like you. This said, if being religious makes you more likely to make ethical choices, I am all for you being religious.
You write: “Many prominent mathematicians and physicists (Einstein, Hilbert and Cantor, to name a few) thought that math an invented set of tools and it seems that most practitioners hold similar beliefs.” What is your evidence for this statement?

Is the Pythagorean theorem true for aliens living in the Andromeda galaxy?

I don’t dispute that your life decisions are based on emotional choices made relatively early on in life, but maybe you shouldn’t project this process onto other people. Religious folk and even some atheists value reason.

Check out these videos: George Ellis
 
Last edited:
And in my opinion, the Bible and veganism are somewhat vague. I mean, I get the opinion very often, "and because the Bible says to eat meat" This text always acts on me like a flea on a bull. As if these people do not understand that crap all these animals are not killed in a humane, huh even in God's way and people think I'm sorry what? That when something is written in the bibli it should be like that? It is a pity that most people who attend church will hurt you more than those who stopped going or never even believed
 
And in my opinion, the Bible and veganism are somewhat vague. I mean, I get the opinion very often, "and because the Bible says to eat meat" This text always acts on me like a flea on a bull. As if these people do not understand that crap all these animals are not killed in a humane, huh even in God's way and people think I'm sorry what? That when something is written in the bibli it should be like that? It is a pity that most people who attend church will hurt you more than those who stopped going or never even believed
Please try to reduce your bigotry directed at religious people. You should try to avoid derogatory generalizations about a particular ethnic group.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Brian W
Please try to reduce your bigotry directed at religious people. You should try to avoid derogatory generalizations about a particular ethnic group.
Please try to reduce your bigotry directed at religious people. You should try to avoid derogatory generalizations about a particular ethnic group.
Believe one delusion and you're very likely to believe another. Anyway, is there such a thing as "humane killing?" There are less cruel ways to kill, but all killing is inhumane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mostly Random Dude
Is the Pythagorean theorem true for aliens living in the Andromeda galaxy?
Not necessarily, it depends on which geometry they exist in. For example, in some non-Euclidian geometries you can still derive distance equations from Pythagorean theorem, but in some it just does not hold at all. As I said, our mathematics are a product of our environment. Someone thinking about the world as a projection on a surface of a sphere (e.g. if these aliens can't get off the planet for some reason and the planet is small relative to their perception) would easily think that some triangles have sum of interior angles greater than 180 degrees.

Check out these videos: George Ellis

I am sorry, this is getting boring. You can't argue about the philosophical roots of mathematics without actually learning some mathematics first.
 
I used to be a full time Bible Believing Christian til there are some groups that controls your life. I also got tired of the end times they always talked about.
I am Happy with a Vegan and Pagan path now.
Not everyone holds beliefs in the Bible. You had good points and loved your efforts of post. However , I rather live my life in peace and have a non Judgmental path.
 
Not necessarily, it depends on which geometry they exist in. For example, in some non-Euclidian geometries you can still derive distance equations from Pythagorean theorem, but in some it just does not hold at all. As I said, our mathematics are a product of our environment. Someone thinking about the world as a projection on a surface of a sphere (e.g. if these aliens can't get off the planet for some reason and the planet is small relative to their perception) would easily think that some triangles have sum of interior angles greater than 180 degrees.



I am sorry, this is getting boring. You can't argue about the philosophical roots of mathematics without actually learning some mathematics first.
No flat surfaces on their planet?

Another question: would non-Euclidean geometry be valid to these aliens?
 
Last edited:
I used to be a full time Bible Believing Christian til there are some groups that controls your life. I also got tired of the end times they always talked about.
I am Happy with a Vegan and Pagan path now.
Not everyone holds beliefs in the Bible. You had good points and loved your efforts of post. However , I rather live my life in peace and have a non Judgmental path.
You seem very judgmental as you are being non judgmental.
 
I wanted to just stay out of this thread, but I can't overlook the hypocrisy of calling someone judgemental for speaking on experiences that led them to change their views.
What can be more judgemental than to follow a belief system that is solely based on judgement!
 
I
I wanted to just stay out of this thread, but I can't overlook the hypocrisy of calling someone judgemental for speaking on experiences that led them to change their views.
What can be more judgemental than to follow a belief system that is solely based on judgement!
Instead of uninformed bigoted generalizations let’s look at the facts. For example, let’s consider the teachings of the founder of Christianity: John 8 BSB
 
Last edited: