Print

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

[Teneb]

nobody on this planet can tell me what comes after death with 100% certainty.

Actually, I can. Now, stop me if this sounds too outlandish, but I am totally convinced that what comes after death is being dead.

Dead people become ammo for the Great Railgun.

[Tack]

Nuh Uh. As soon as you die the simulation resets with slightly different variables. This is all part of your 2070 "aptitude and satisfaction" career searching plugin.

[Teneb]

Nuh Uh. As soon as you die the simulation resets with slightly different variables. This is all part of your 2070 "aptitude and satisfaction" career searching plugin.

That sounds like heresy to me.

* Teneb charges his railgun

[Archibald]

My dude, I literally said none of the things you responded with. I did not blame religion as an excuse for political agendas--although it has been oft used that way in historical and modern settings--I DID say that organized religion is corrupt, to which I will stick as there is far more than one rotten apple in the basket. I did not claim that I knew what came after death either, in fact I made a point of it to say that neither of us did, which is why it would be wrong to assume you know well enough what does to ethically convert someone.

Also, one of those things is not like the others.

EDIT: ALSO, you're literally just pointing out dictators who happen to be Atheists. There were plenty of pretty evil religious dictators as well--or dictators who used religion for evil. Etc. When you're the Pope.... it's kind of expected that you won't be an evil, politically-motivated, family scheming bastard.

First of all, I apologize if it hurt you in any way, as I was trying to respond both comments in one paragraph. As for the dictator thing; just because one claims they are religious, it does not mean they are. If you are a follower of a religion, it is expected to behave in a way that your religion dictates (I think that is the word for it, I am not an English speaker). It is also expected from a citizen to obey the rules made by the government and yet not all of them do. Things, not words. As for death, the holy book of my religion is my "insurance", for the lack of a better word.

As for Tack:

"The burden of proof is on the believer."

It goes both ways, you know? You should be able to support your belief the same way I am to support mine. But I will go ahead and say that debating about it will ultimately change nothing so do not bother. I will remain a believer, you will not. As I said, I cannot do something for someone if they will not do it themselves.

As for the last sentence; faith without works is dead, just as works without faith. If pride is your motivator, then it is only gonna be your downfall, like it was to many other people in history. If it is effort, it is futile. You, a mortal, are going against something that is far greater than all of us. It is like trying to grab a tsunami with your hands.

[Tack]

To grab at a tsunami, or stand in front of a tank, is the greatest feature of humanity and that is something I'm unwavering on.

[Archibald]

To grab at a tsunami, or stand in front of a tank, is the greatest feature of humanity and that is something I'm unwavering on.

*Shrug* Do as you wish. If you want to beat your head against a wall then who am I to stop you. Although we can go so far to say that your "fate is sealed". At least you can't blame me I didn't warn you.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

First of all, I apologize if it hurt you in any way, as I was trying to respond both comments in one paragraph. As for the dictator thing; just because one claims they are religious, it does not mean they are. If you are a follower of a religion, it is expected to behave in a way that your religion dictates (I think that is the word for it, I am not an English speaker). It is also expected from a citizen to obey the rules made by the government and yet not all of them do. Things, not words. As for death, the holy book of my religion is my "insurance", for the lack of a better word.

Okay. I am not arguing that YOU don't believe in the afterlife. Obviously you do. Unfortunately, empirically you have no proof of this and thus cannot be 100% certain that an afterlife DOES exist. On that basis alone, it would be unfair to convince someone that it DOES exist. It's the blind leading the blind, so to speak. Again. To be TOTALLY CLEAR. You can believe whatever you choose, but you need to recognize that you can't logically prove it and thus have no basis to force your belief onto others as if it were fact.

EDIT: and to be totally clear. I am not trying to convince you that an afterlife does or does not exist, just that that is an impossible question to answer, and that you cannot use it as a given.

I have found very little that indicates Napoleon and Mussolini were atheists. Just, you know, putting it out here. I do like how you immediately went off to list them evil atheists. Please don't do that.

Disclaimer: I am neither atheist nor christian.

Dood. Read. C'mon (assuming you're responding to me, it's unclear.) I literally phrased it as evil people (except maaaaybe Napoleon) who happened to be Atheists and that there were other dictators who were religious or used religion for evil.

Disclaimer: I am an Atheist, and if you think I labelled Atheists as evil there--well, ya wrong, boi.

EDIT2: After rereading some things:

I will remain a believer, you will not. As I said, I cannot do something for someone if they will not do it themselves.

As for the last sentence; faith without works is dead, just as works without faith. If pride is your motivator, then it is only gonna be your downfall, like it was to many other people in history. If it is effort, it is futile. You, a mortal, are going against something that is far greater than all of us. It is like trying to grab a tsunami with your hands.

See. This is where you have to recognize that you have a belief, but that it is not fact. To automatically assume that because someone is not faithful, they are a bad person, worse off, or in some kind of trouble is simply prideful and unsubstantiated. The fact is, we cannot know who is better off--if any of us are better off believing one way or the other at all. You may believe you are better off or in the right, and you may be, but we cannot know. It's a toss up. So unknowable that we cannot even begin to ballpark the answer. Even if we believe certain things. We can still rationally recognize our own limited knowledge.

To your second paragraph, I reply the same. Simply put, there is nothing either of us can prove. Though I will say that there are plenty of people who are not religious who provide for others from the good of their hearts.

[Teneb]

I have found very little that indicates Napoleon and Mussolini were atheists. Just, you know, putting it out here. I do like how you immediately went off to list them evil atheists. Please don't do that.

Disclaimer: I am neither atheist nor christian.

Dood. Read. C'mon (assuming you're responding to me, it's unclear.) I literally phrased it as evil people (except maaaaybe Napoleon) who happened to be Atheists and that there were other dictators who were religious or used religion for evil.

Disclaimer: I am an Atheist, and if you think I labelled Atheists as evil there--well, ya wrong, boi.

/sarcasm

[Rolan7]

To grab at a tsunami, or stand in front of a tank, is the greatest feature of humanity and that is something I'm unwavering on.

*Shrug* Do as you wish. If you want to beat your head against a wall then who am I to stop you. Although we can go so far to say that your "fate is sealed". At least you can't blame me I didn't warn you.

Before anyone calls this a threat, keep in mind that it's not Archibald making the threat.  Archibald's just warning us of something very dire which they think is true.
The various architects of Christianity may deserve various amounts of blame, and/or the evolution of mythologies over time.  But it shouldn't be taken personally.

Trying to convert people even casually is a really fucked up thing to do, just so you know.

If you have no doubt, and think you might actually succeed, it's the only moral course of action.  That's why these ideas spread so well, and why the most successful surviving ones are very focused on evangelism (or at least, resisting deconversion).

Maybe it's possible to have true personal faith, though, but enough doubt not to try and convert others.  I'm curious as to how that sort of thinking works, which is one reason I think we should be nice to religious people who dare post ):<

[Teneb]

Maybe it's possible to have true personal faith, though, but enough doubt not to try and convert others.  I'm curious as to how that sort of thinking works, which is one reason I think we should be nice to religious people who dare post ):<

I do have a deep personal faith that Chaos is the natural state of the universe and that there is no true meaning or purpose to existence. I also have zero interest in  converting others. So perfectly possible.

Since my "them evil atheists" sarcasm was taken seriously when it was sarcasm, I'll make clear that the above is not sarcasm.

[Trekkin]

It is like trying to grab a tsunami with your hands.

In that it's a lot easier if you're piloting a Jaeger? (http://www.quotes.net/mquote/123627)

I'm in partial agreement with Tack on this one: humans are unsurpassed at being tiny, brief, weak and fragile and nonetheless doing amazing things and then taking them for granted because doing the apparently impossible is our standard operating procedure. If we can't grab a tsunami, we will try to build hands that can, and there's a very good chance we will eventually succeed unless we find something even better to do with tsunamis. It's just what we do.

I'm just an existentialist (or more properly an absurdist) rather than a nihilist. If nothing in the Universe means anything, then we might as well go play with as much of it as possible.

[Tack]

To grab at a tsunami, or stand in front of a tank, is the greatest feature of humanity and that is something I'm unwavering on.

*Shrug* Do as you wish. If you want to beat your head against a wall then who am I to stop you. Although we can go so far to say that your "fate is sealed". At least you can't blame me I didn't warn you.

Before anyone calls this a threat, keep in mind that it's not Archibald making the threat.  Archibald's just warning us of something very dire which they think is true.
The various architects of Christianity may deserve various amounts of blame, and/or the evolution of mythologies over time.  But it shouldn't be taken personally.

The whole idea of most faiths is that failing to believe in that faith is punished by "fate worse than death". With that kind of hanging over the heads of your friends and loved ones, casual conversion is maybe the "best option".

To be fair I essentially said that exact same thing. I'm aware of what awaits me if I'm wrong.
By the merits of whoever that guy was who said "it's better to be a believer than not, simply based on what you have to gain vs what you have to lose", I should well go along with it anyway.

But it's not about that. It's about morality. Simply saying "God is stronger than you" doesn't make me think He's more right. A better argument would be the "there's a plan, it's infinitely beyond your understanding, but your faith happens to be necessary"
Because everything else makes me think God is either petty or an answering machine.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

I like how Stephen Fry put it once, roughly paraphrased it goes something like being an Atheist is not just about the question of whether or not a god(s) exists or not, but about what kind of god(s) it is.

In my opinion, of all the gods I have heard of, learned of, or researched--none have done much to truly earn human worship.

[Archibald]

Maybe it's possible to have true personal faith, though, but enough doubt not to try and convert others.  I'm curious as to how that sort of thinking works, which is one reason I think we should be nice to religious people who dare post ):<

You misunderstood. I can only go so far as to give someone an advice. It is up to them to listen or not. Forcing someone to believe is both immoral and not an act of true faith. Like I said before, each of us will give an account of ourselves at the end of our lives.

As for Tack: Even if try, what is the point if you are stubbornly trying to do the contrary? If you keep refusing what is good, then by all means, do it. End of story.

[Teneb]

You misunderstood. I can only go so far as to give someone an advice. It is up to them to listen or not. Forcing someone to believe is both immoral and not an act of true faith. Like I said before, each of us will give an account of ourselves at the end of our lives.

To you, it's just advice. To the person on the receiving end, it's annoying and disrespectful.