Religion.

[Blacken]

Once again, the Team Atheist thing was a continued joke. If you're offended, feel free to cry on Esau's shoulder or something. I also have no intention of just saying "logic doesn't apply to God" Whether it does or doesn't, I wouldn't do that outside of a joke. If I did that seriously, then what the hell are we debating/girly fighting/arguing about? There's only two ways to do this, with logic and evidence, or with logic and pride. Logic and pride is infinitely strong than logic and evidence, but that's why we should try it... just for a few pages or so.

Are...you...serious? I mean...really? "Pride" is "infinitely strong" (I assume you mean "stronger"; comparative adjectives are your friends!) than evidence? Please tell me that this is some kind of sick mindfucked joke.

And I'm pretty sure you declaring someone your NEMESIS!!!!1!!111!!oneoneone is pretty irrelevant to...uh...everyone. "Ignored truth" is pretty fuckin' rich too, considering that by definition those who have "faith" have no substantiative evidence and thus no proof and, thus, no "truth." Accept that you're talking to societally implanted psychotic delusions and if you want to keep talking to them, great--but don't waste anyone's time by calling them "truth."

Food for thought: you won't find many credible people involved in the psychological professions who will disagree with the statement "if religion didn't predate psychology, it'd be considered a mental illness." Why is that?

(Isn't it interesting how people in this thread choose to be offended when someone attacks their stances, like they were attacking themselves? Buying so deeply into anything is sick. An atheist will believe in God when proof is provided; a religious person simply believes without proof. It's curious.)

Edited December 9, 2008 by Blacken

[Paradox]

Oh quanta, make love to me <3

To Quanta:

Yeah, do me a favor, and don't drag verses out of the Bible if you're just trying to get the thing discounted.

You go ahead and "interpret" everything in the Bible literally if you want to. Don't look at the original language, don't study the intent of what is said, don't give anything a second thought. Just read the Book and pull another bs religion out of your ass. I'm not stopping you. I have a different method though which works for me B)

Did we read the same post by quanta? You asked a question, he provided an explanation, and furthermore

D) who cares, Revelations is symbolic anyways and certainly not meant to be read literally, just like a great deal of the Bible (including or excepting perhaps, that whole part of God being perfect, Adam and Eve, Jesus being risen from the dead, Moses parting the Red Sea, etc. etc.), or finally E) Revelations shouldn't be canon nor should any other passages supporting the theory of eternal "punishing" be canon, it's a load of bullshit, and I'm clearly more qualified to decide it isn't than the many scholars who decided it was (barring certain sects where it isn't canon, etc.); here are my reasons.

If you're sane, you'll probably go with D or E, but I'm not deciding here.

[California Mountain Snake]

Don't look at the original language, don't study the intent of what is said, don't give anything a second thought. Just read the Book and pull another bs religion out of your ass. I'm not stopping you. I have a different method though which works for me B)

I'm shocked to learn that you know Aramaic.

Edited December 9, 2008 by Black Knight

[Phoenix]

Are...you...serious? I mean...really? "Pride" is "infinitely strong" (I assume you mean "stronger"; comparative adjectives are your friends!) than evidence? Please tell me that this is some kind of sick mindfucked joke.

And I'm pretty sure you declaring someone your NEMESIS!!!!1!!111!!oneoneone is pretty irrelevant to...uh...everyone. "Ignored truth" is pretty fuckin' rich too, considering that by definition those who have "faith" have no substantiative evidence and thus no proof and, thus, no "truth." Accept that you're talking to societally implanted psychotic delusions and if you want to keep talking to them, great--but don't waste anyone's time by calling them "truth."

Food for thought: you won't find many credible people involved in the psychological professions who will disagree with the statement "if religion didn't predate psychology, it'd be considered a mental illness." Why is that?

(Isn't it interesting how people in this thread choose to be offended when someone attacks their stances, like they were attacking themselves? Buying so deeply into anything is sick. An atheist will believe in God when proof is provided; a religious person simply believes without proof. It's curious.)

... ... ...

Ahem... Where to start...? Pride. When I say pride is stronger than evidence, I'm saying that in the end, no matter what, some people will believe something because of Pride, and not evidence. Don't bother reading anything I post. It's a waste of your time. Yeah, even reading this part will probably not help you out much. I'm sure you'll read too much into this too.

The Nemisis thing was a joke. Is that strange? Well whatever.

When I said thou hast ignored truth, I said he didn't listen to me when I said I wasn't dodging anything. I'm not talking about religion. In fact anything I refer to as the truth will probably have nothing to do with religion at all.

I already called religion what it is. It's a combination of Personal Proof, Logic, and Faith. The reason it "might" be considered a mental illness is because of how it appears. Simple. And it's not like religious folk care how the world as a whole thinks. They've got their personal proof which to them makes the religion correct.

Honestly I don't have any interest in proving God as an existing being. Even if I could(even if I could just instantly show you undeniable proof of his existence), I would have to be in a very good mood to bother with actually showing you. I mean what would be the point of proving God to anyone? Salvation? I'm not so sure about that. Since it's not my job to convert people, it's also not my job to prove God is real. My job is to focus on my own mind. It's an absolute waste of time and energy to ever endeavor on a proving quest. I'm here to out of sheer bordem, and curiousity. Yeah selfish I guess, but should I try to help those who want help? Not those who don't. And it is always debatable that my "help" is such and not just delusion.

[quanta]

Either we can look at God logically and try to apply things to him, or we can just not bother and each jump to our respective sides. Look there's no point in going over this damnable objective perfection because realistically it doesn't exist. Applying that to God is a waste of time, and you're clearly discounting a few details prematurely. Let's fight about something else. Besides... why try to crush my subjective perfection at all? Humans are at their best possible condition when they're having a "Red Sea" moment. Relying on Faith alone isn't that crazy. Illogical... yeah, but not crazy.

Relying on faith alone is incredibly stupid. Any good Catholic philosopher would've told you that much. That's why theologians like St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas wrestled so much with the problem of the omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God, because logical consistency matters. Because people were willing to question blind Faith (Faith without reason), think things through, and consider reason and evidence we have gained things like modern medicine (remember that the Catholic Church thought dissecting a human body was wrong, thus a huge lack of anatomical knowledge and persecution of those who sought it), modern biology (the theory of evolution), modern physics and astronomy (The earth orbits the sun; no thanks to the Catholic church for beating down Galileo for daring to question the heliocentric theory), and importantly to religious people more sane interpretations of the Bible, since many passages are meant to teach moral lessons, not be a literal history (and the ones that are supposed to be literal history are often highly questionable on the details; miracles don't happen, period, end of story).

To Quanta:

Yeah, do me a favor, and don't drag verses out of the Bible if you're just trying to get the thing discounted.

You go ahead and "interpret" everything in the Bible literally if you want to. Don't look at the original language, don't study the intent of what is said, don't give anything a second thought. Just read the Book and pull another bs religion out of your ass. I'm not stopping you. I have a different method though which works for me cool.gif

I'll just respond with what I said yesterday in the very passage you're responding to. It's almost like I'm psychic or something.

Unless you want to respond... D) who cares, Revelations is symbolic anyways and certainly not meant to be read literally, just like a great deal of the Bible (including or excepting perhaps, that whole part of God being perfect, Adam and Eve, Jesus being risen from the dead, Moses parting the Red Sea, etc. etc.)

Once again, the Team Atheist thing was a continued joke. If you're offended, feel free to cry on Esau's shoulder or something. I also have no intention of just saying "logic doesn't apply to God" Whether it does or doesn't, I wouldn't do that outside of a joke. If I did that seriously, then what the hell are we debating/girly fighting/arguing about? There's only two ways to do this, with logic and evidence, or with logic and pride. Logic and pride is infinitely strong than logic and evidence, but that's why we should try it... just for a few pages or so.

...

EDIT:

Since it's not my job to convert people, it's also not my job to prove God is real. My job is to focus on my own mind. It's an absolute waste of time and energy to ever endeavor on a proving quest.

Do you even read your own Bible? Like, ever? Does "Fishers of men" ring any bells? (and yes what Jesus tells the twelve to do, generally applies to all his disciples) Do you know what the Epistles are? Do you remember what religion Evangelism has its roots in? HELLO! IS ANYBODY IN THERE?

Edited December 9, 2008 by quanta

[Esau of Isaac]

Yeah... I think I'm about ready to never tell another joke in the General section again. You guys are WAY to emotional.

"Don't catagorize me!"

Fine I won't. I just call each of you by name. Does that make you feel better?

It makes me sexually aroused, Phoenix.

To answer Esau's question about the two morons who like to judge each other's cooking.

They are both imperfect. I am applying the Creator's view of perfection to GOD, not to human beings. In traditional Christianity, God is viewed as almighty, there's noone else on his level. You gave me a question concerning to entities on the same level, or plane of existence. That's ignoring the Biblical interpretation of God as a whole isn't it?

How in the fucking world did you come up with this? You go about defining perfection, and then when I actually point out the stupidity in your argument, you defend that oh, did I mention, this only applies to God.

I mean, do you even now understand what this means? This now means that God can't be perfect, because if perfect is defined as being made exactly as its creator wished then God is not possibly perfect, since the Bible itself says that he has no creator, that he is both the beginning and the end.

Either we can look at God logically and try to apply things to him, or we can just not bother and each jump to our respective sides. Look there's no point in going over this damnable objective perfection because realistically it doesn't exist. Applying that to God is a waste of time, and you're clearly discounting a few details prematurely. Let's fight about something else. Besides... why try to crush my subjective perfection at all? Humans are at their best possible condition when they're having a "Red Sea" moment. Relying on Faith alone isn't that crazy. Illogical... yeah, but not crazy.

Why try to crush your subjective perfection? Because it's wrong. It's not what's being applied in the Bible. The entire point was to discuss why the God of the Bible is impossible by the qualities it is defined with.

[Phoenix]

(Phoenix)

Since it's not my job to convert people, it's also not my job to prove God is real. My job is to focus on my own mind. It's an absolute waste of time and energy to ever endeavor on a proving quest.

Do you even read your own Bible? Like, ever? Does "Fishers of men" ring any bells? (and yes what Jesus tells the twelve to do, generally applies to all his disciples) Do you know what the Epistles are? Do you remember what religion Evangelism has its roots in? HELLO! IS ANYBODY IN THERE?

Listen carefully, Quanta. I AM NOT A TRADITIONAL CHRISTIAN. It is not my job to spread this good news of salvation around like a f*cking epidemic! There is absolutely no sanity in preaching the supposed truth in todays world. Some people just need to go about their lives and die. And don't worry, you're not going to suffer eteranl punishing. Whether or not God exists: NO ONE IS GOING TO BURN ALIVE FOR ALL ETERNITY.

There's just no good that will come of thoughtless evangelism. Everybody seems to think God is saving the world right now. And with traditional views of the Bible, that is the only conclusion someone can reach. I find that the world's current condition is evidence that God assuming he exists is NOT trying to save it at this point in time. Since this is what I believe, that means it is tantamount to insanity to try and convert anyone. Therefore it is NOT my job, it is NOT my responsibility to hijack people's minds and make them raise their hands in praise to the Lord. It's my job to focus on me. MY flaws, and MY short comings.

In short, go convert yourself. I'm no evangelist.

[quanta]

Awesome, so one thing then.

I find that the world's current condition is evidence that God assuming he exists is NOT trying to save it at this point in time.

Your belief would seem to indicate God isn't omnibenevolent. Isn't this one of the issues at hand?

[Phoenix]

Awesome, so one thing then.

Your belief would seem to indicate God isn't omnibenevolent. Isn't this one of the issues at hand?

This is one of many reasons I'm not a Traditional Christian. The very fact that people believe in instant judgement upon death forces them to ignore the possibility of every single person who ever died being resurrected at a later time. That's why I said they had to live and die. Death can be humbling, even for a Satanist

[California Mountain Snake]

The very fact that people believe in instant judgement upon death"

No one believes that, even evangelicals and other nut jobs. Judgement doesn't come until after the Rapture and all that jazz. Right now everyone's just lying in the ground, waiting (which is why everyone needs a tombstone, so that their bodies may be found on the day of judgment and their fate may finally be determined).

Edited December 9, 2008 by Black Knight

[Esau of Isaac]

No one believes that, even evangelicals and other nut jobs. Judgement doesn't come until after the Rapture and all that jazz. Right now everyone's just lying in the ground, waiting (which is why everyone needs a tombstone, so that their bodies may be found on the day of judgment and their fate may finally be determined).

I'm not sure of other branches of Christianity as much as Catholicism, but while the judgment of man itself is not supposed to occur until the Second Coming, an individual's soul is believed to receive either eternal punishment or heaven the moment they have died.

1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification or immediately, -- or immediate and everlasting damnation.

[Phoenix]

Ah but another episode of "Why bother?".

I'm just going to rant, and see if anyone get's what I'm trying to say.

Burying bodies in the ground so they can be found? And what happens to the folks that keep cremating themselves? A resurrection shouldn't require a "body" at all. Is it a stretch of the imagination to think that God can just conger up another one for you to use? Some bodies are just husks or skeletons now anyway. The very purpose of burying the dead is to return them to the Earth.

LOL It's kind of like putting a twinkie infront of a starving hid and keeping it out of his reach for twelve hours. Not to sound insensitive, but bodies are supposed to decay, and the process take much longer in coffins. Tombstones are nice if you want to go talk to a corpse at it's exact location. Wait why? It's dead. Isn't the ghost the one you talk to? Why would the ghost want you to visit it's grave? You've got a busy schedule. Why doesn't the ghost come visit you? Oh wait it's in Heaven or Hell right? Wait what?

I think I see some problems here.

Is the Phoenix crazy to not adhere to traditional beliefs? Esau? Revan? Anybody?

I think I'll stick with my own interpretation as it makes more sence than this.

[Defeatist Elitist]

Ah but another episode of "Why bother?".

I'm just going to rant, and see if anyone get's what I'm trying to say.

Burying bodies in the ground so they can be found? And what happens to the folks that keep cremating themselves? A resurrection shouldn't require a "body" at all. Is it a stretch of the imagination to think that God can just conger up another one for you to use? Some bodies are just husks or skeletons now anyway. The very purpose of burying the dead is to return them to the Earth.

LOL It's kind of like putting a twinkie infront of a starving hid and keeping it out of his reach for twelve hours. Not to sound insensitive, but bodies are supposed to decay, and the process take much longer in coffins. Tombstones are nice if you want to go talk to a corpse at it's exact location. Wait why? It's dead. Isn't the ghost the one you talk to? Why would the ghost want you to visit it's grave? You've got a busy schedule. Why doesn't the ghost come visit you? Oh wait it's in Heaven or Hell right? Wait what?

I think I see some problems here.

Is the Phoenix crazy to not adhere to traditional beliefs? Esau? Revan? Anybody?

I think I'll stick with my own interpretation as it makes more sence than this.

I dunno. Not sticking to the traditional beliefs is a good plan, but your beliefs don't really seem that much more sane. :P

So no, it's not crazy to reject traditional Christian Beliefs, but you might still be crazy based on what you substituted it for.

[Phoenix]

I dunno. Not sticking to the traditional beliefs is a good plan, but your beliefs don't really seem that much more sane. :P

So no, it's not crazy to reject traditional Christian Beliefs, but you might still be crazy based on what you substituted it for.

I'm talking about slightly illogical religious interpretations of the Bible. Mine don't have nearly as many supposed contradictions as traditional stuff does.

[Esau of Isaac]

Burying bodies in the ground so they can be found? And what happens to the folks that keep cremating themselves? A resurrection shouldn't require a "body" at all. Is it a stretch of the imagination to think that God can just conger up another one for you to use? Some bodies are just husks or skeletons now anyway. The very purpose of burying the dead is to return them to the Earth.

LOL It's kind of like putting a twinkie infront of a starving hid and keeping it out of his reach for twelve hours. Not to sound insensitive, but bodies are supposed to decay, and the process take much longer in coffins. Tombstones are nice if you want to go talk to a corpse at it's exact location. Wait why? It's dead. Isn't the ghost the one you talk to? Why would the ghost want you to visit it's grave? You've got a busy schedule. Why doesn't the ghost come visit you? Oh wait it's in Heaven or Hell right? Wait what?

Burial is meant as a means of respect and acknowledgment of another. For many, it's a way to continue being even after they have died, in that they have left their own mark on the world that signals they existed. It also serves to help comfort loved ones in that while the individual is dead, they are closer to being tangibly around, in that some vestige of the individual remains.

Is the Phoenix crazy to not adhere to traditional beliefs? Esau? Revan? Anybody?

No, not at all; but you're crazy if you think most of your ideas are supported by the Bible, unless you've reformed them following our previous discussion on the FEE forums.

I think I'll stick with my own interpretation as it makes more sence than this.

What interpretation? That man doesn't exist after death? Because that doesn't make sense in the world of the Bible.

Edited December 10, 2008 by Esau of Isaac

[Phoenix]

Burial is meant as a means of respect and acknowledgment of another. For many, it's a way to continue being even after they have died, in that they have left their own mark on the world that signals they existed. It also serves to help comfort loved ones in that while the individual is dead, they are closer to being tangibly around, in that some vestige of the individual remains.

No, not at all; but you're crazy if you think most of your ideas are supported by the Bible, unless you've reformed them following our previous discussion on the FEE forums.

What interpretation? That man doesn't exist after death? Because that doesn't make sense in the world of the Bible.

There's more to my beliefs than just a few realistic view points.

Me and my father were discussing this death thing and he was upset that I don't plan to talk to him in his grave. As if he could even hear me. It's kinda pointless. I'd prefer not to even have a grave myself. What's the point? I actually like the idea of leaving no evidence behind at all, but gotta be lucky enough to be reduced to ashes for that. That means cremation, or going out in massive explosion. Ah I'll worry about this later.

[Junkhead]

I have no religion, I am what you call and "Atheist".

[DeSu]

I think Christianity could be good if they didn't selectively choose what they wanted to believe in from the Bible and lived by what it actually says, not warped versions.

[YokaiKnight]

I think Christianity could be good if they didn't selectively choose what they wanted to believe in from the Bible and lived by what it actually says, not warped versions.

It's a little hard to do that, considering the volume of contradictory, outdated, and morally questionable content in the Bible.

[DeSu]

True. There are plenty of bad things in there too. It's just too bad that people decided to pick the worst things to follow... Divorce is more looked down upon in the bible than homosexuality, yet what country has the highest divorce rate?

[Thingy Person]

I still like the Bible more than the Koran (english pelling plz) because the Bible is enforced by people of the same mentality as the ones who wrote it, even should it be a con to exact power over a lot of people. As a result, those people were able to update and handle their book accordingly. The Koran contains a lot more good points (though it's partially outdated; it was a bad idea to eat pork back in the day, but now...) but was completely misinterpreted(/misused?) in later generations, by people who had no clue of what lies behind the writing. For example, it says that woman (and men!) must cover their "shame". Anyone should know what that means, but somehow, women are now forced to cover all of their hair and sometimes every square inch of their skin. Not to mention "female circumscision" *shudders*

I don't want to evoke discussion as I don't mean anything I suggested above, but my point is that it's better to be led by people who know what they're doing. Even if the bible contains some rather loathsome principles, the idealistic content is still there.

[Cynthia]

Wow, 39 pages?

I'm a little surprised at how long this topic lasted without being closed.

Also, the Koran is also the Quaran, they are the same I believe. If I'm mistaken please correct me.

[Thingy Person]

Wow, 39 pages?

I'm a little surprised at how long this topic lasted without being closed.

Also, the Koran is also the Quaran, they are the same I believe. If I'm mistaken please correct me.

Yeah, the Quaran. The Quaran and the Sunna (if that isn't the wrong spelling also).

But the Sunna must be worse because Ozzy bin Laden is a sunnite.

Edited December 16, 2008 by Thingy Person

[YokaiKnight]

True. There are plenty of bad things in there too. It's just too bad that people decided to pick the worst things to follow... Divorce is more looked down upon in the bible than homosexuality, yet what country has the highest divorce rate?

The Maldives?

Edited December 17, 2008 by YokaiKnight

[Phoenix]

Divorce? *hiss* What part of "til death do us part" don't they understand? If you want to not be married to someone anymore, just kill yourself, or kill them, which ever is easier. (That statement is entirely serious.)