Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sordid]

Most of that post was written in relation to myself.  The god I was referring to was the capital G of Christianity.

Well that's too bad because the ultimate ruler of the universe is Ahura Mazda. You lose the game, have a nice day... IN HELL.

I guess we'll just have to see but if God is really as petty as you make him out.

Ain't us. You have read the Bible, yes?

[Rilder]

As long as they used well reason approach.

Why? Its their religion they can choose it however they want, even if they think one of their gods is cool or one of the Goddesses is hot.

I originally chose the Hellenic Pantheon because I like history in the time period that we were a major religion...

Your shittin me right?

If you blindly self assert something as true, and therefore valid then all things are.

Including the belief that fucking and devouring child is a good thing. If its true for me...

 That is a bad methodology. Leads to terrible things, and at best silly things.

'Its true to me.' is shallow thinking.

If you think "fucking and devouring child" is  a good thing then your morals are fucked up any ways and religion won't change that.

[Jreengus]

As long as they used well reason approach.

Why? Its their religion they can choose it however they want, even if they think one of their gods is cool or one of the Goddesses is hot.

I originally chose the Hellenic Pantheon because I like history in the time period that we were a major religion...

Your shittin me right?

If you blindly self assert something as true, and therefore valid then all things are.

Including the belief that fucking and devouring child is a good thing. If its true for me...

 That is a bad methodology. Leads to terrible things, and at best silly things.

'Its true to me.' is shallow thinking.

If you think "fucking and devouring child" is  a good thing then your morals are fucked up any ways and religion won't change that.

When a few versions down the line DF supports that you are going to eat those words, and a child.

[RAM]

An ambition is still a belief, you don't know if it's really possible, or if it will be what you want, but you still aspire towards it, thus, a belief.

What if you believe that the ambition is false, do not aspire towards it at all, and follow it simply for a lack of anything that can be defined as being better?

[TheNewerMartianEmperor]

Then you are a rather depressing person.

[Rvlion]

Most of that post was written in relation to myself.  The god I was referring to was the capital G of Christianity.  I'm sure if I had the ultimate power of creation and destruction I wouldn't be so petty as to get offended by a little self interest at least not enough to condemn them to eternal suffering and the like.  I'm not too scared of what will happen if I'm to be judged as I'm a chill dude. Besides I'd look like the paragon of humanity and the pinnacle of all that is right besides a lot of people alive in this world today. Just look at all the murderers, rapists, and the like. I guess we'll just have to see but if God is really as petty as you make him out to be then I suspect we're going to be seeing a South Park movie type scenario.

Really man, if god truly exists why would he let his flock murder each other out and not to mention his other children.
If god really exists and all of us non believers and believers alike stand before the heavenly gate the gatekeeper will keep it locked for us humans and point us to a small insignificant side door leading straight to hell.
How much believers have killed and murdered in the name of god and how much non believers have killed and murdered in the name of power.

...this neatly avoids the real question at hand, which is not whether Religion is good or not, but whether it is correct or not.

I think I'm seeing a pattern here. I'd say over half of this thread has been to discuss the effects of (a lack of) Religion. It's impossible to say whether or not it's correct. Is there an effect of God? Yes. He created humans. But atheists say that humans were created from evolution. But modern religionists say that God 'created' them by evolving them. But atheists say you don't need a God to evolve things.

Well, there, you can't really prove it either way. You can twist facts to support your view. Or.. you could personally attack people and their beliefs. That's the easy way.

The bible in near ancient times was a book of nice fictive stories written by someone who wanted power. The fact that during Europe’s dark ages the pope was more important as he was the hand of god than a king or queen proves my case beyond reasonable doubt and what better way to gain power then by slowly brainwashing the masses with stories about an almighty entity in a expensive looking building.

Now to get back on your quote. It is very nice of you to say that twisting facts or personally attacking some ones believe is the easy way, but to be very honest… Apart from the fact that so-called heathens during the dark ages were either forced to believe in the Christian God or be killed/banned/tortured/ [insert your own punishment] (also see the Spanish Inquisition as the best possible example). The humans on this world have never been kind to people who think differently then themselves:
1. See the mayor religions and their intolerable attitude towards each other in various time periods throughout history.
2. See the European nations who conquered the American continent in the name of God and at the same time nearly diminishing the native population by either disease or bullets.
3. See the US nearly finishing that job in the name of expansion to the west by dumping them in reservations as if the Native Americans were cattle to keep safe from the outside world.

Throughout history things have been done in the name of god that should not have been tolerated by the almighty god.
Even if he was to think that it was too far beneath him to answer every common prayer I cannot believe that if he existed he would have condoned that mass extermination of the Native Americans in his name. Not to mention the mass extermination of the Jews during WW2.

To end my other donated 2c (damn soon I will be broke)
In my personal opinion at the moment that someone cannot have a normal discussion about in this case his/her religion without feeling personally insulted about the arguments the other person places on the table that insulted person is way to committed to his belief and almost borderline fanatic. This is the same problem with Muslims today 1 stupid drawing in Denmark and the entire muslim population on this freaking planet is ready for war.

Although I at least try to respect people’s beliefs, but I still believe that some religions that exist today can as a whole be counted as a mayor root of evil in the world today.

All right I am ready for the flaming… [non-believer heatshield on!]

[jayt]

I doubt many people go from Atheist to Christian. Religion never worries me too much, whereas for most Atheists (or at least, those I've encountered) they're very vocal in their belief and seem to focus on it a fair bit. If you're like the Atheists I've met, you really believe in your ideals, very strongly and probably won't change them. From what I've seen.

A lot of my extended family are devout and vocal catholic Christians, and I could copy replace atheist with Christian your quote.

[LegoLord]

Actually, most of the Bible's writers had very little political power.  As it has been said before, religious texts frequently do not have any mention of the organizations associated with them.

In fact, the reformation happened because of the pope; once more people were learning how to read again, they found out that their bible had no mention of the Roman Catholic Church or the Pope or taxes paid to them.  So they split of and formed their own factions of Christianity where they didn't have to deal with all that.  Most people can read now, so the Pope has had his influence greatly reduced from what it was in the middle ages.  It was more of a time period ripe for power-grabbing than a religion that grabbed for power that allowed for the pope to arise.

[jaked122]

well, not pure, but far more so than the US.

O_o
 what do you mean, I don' understand how the US isn't a pure democracy.
wait are you dissing the fact it gives people constitutional rights?
No, I think you've fallen for the conspiracy theory that all representatives are corrupted by the power, that's only a small faction of the senators and house reps, that tends to include both parties evenly.

[Vester]

well, not pure, but far more so than the US.

O_o
 what do you mean, I don' understand how the US isn't a pure democracy.
wait are you dissing the fact it gives people constitutional rights?
No, I think you've fallen for the conspiracy theory that all representatives are corrupted by the power, that's only a small faction of the senators and house reps, that tends to include both parties evenly.

There is no such thing as a pure democracy in this day and age, period.

[LegoLord]

In a pure democracy everyone would be allowed to vote on everything.  The US is a democratic Republic, as we democratically elect representatives who run things.  We also have a democratic amendment process.  But for laws and bills, it's a republic.

[Andir]

There is no such thing as a pure democracy in this day and age, period.

Sure there is... it's called a mob.   Everyone's allowed to do whatever they want as long it complies with the rest of the mob, otherwise you are going to get run over.  These usually end poorly with police intervention and loads of tear gas.

[Vester]

Heh.

Okay, there is no such thing as a pure democracy that lasts for longer than it takes for the police to get their riot shields.

[cerapa]

Well, cept anarchy.

[redacted123]

well, not pure, but far more so than the US.

O_o
 what do you mean, I don' understand how the US isn't a pure democracy.
wait are you dissing the fact it gives people constitutional rights?
No, I think you've fallen for the conspiracy theory that all representatives are corrupted by the power, that's only a small faction of the senators and house reps, that tends to include both parties evenly.

Of course that's not what I'm saying but the US is a republic, it defines itself as one, more or less. Republic does not equal democracy.