Religion

[Cuchulainn]

All Religions are crap. All they mean is Power over the Masses. Mind control freaks. Look at Roman Catholism & ISLAM. :starwars:

[DaviusMaximus]

My Irish Friend;

You and I are war-babies I see. My I ask, what is your opinon on the question: what's the difference between having 'faith' and being 'religious'?
And does not excepting the dogmas of the three great religions define you as an atheist?

Davius

[mickydoolittle]

babble babble blah blah blah babble

Does it really matter one or the other? No. Because it is indeed all horseshit in the end.

[DarkAce]

I wouldn't say all religions are crap and out to control the masses. The big 2 out there and their denominations surely fit the category you described however from what I've seen, some of the far eastern religions aren't like their western counterparts. In some of them they are great about teaching morals, ethics, and understandings and don't force condemning BS all over you and trying to explain how everything began and how it will end. Confucianism is a good example of this. Unfortunatly most people that adhere to religions like Christianity, find the teachings of these religions way too complicated and can't figure out the metaphors and/or the analogies.

[DaviusMaximus]

Mickey;

Are you closed-minded, deaf, dumb, and stupid? I doubt it! So, please, let's just 'talk' about the subject. I don't think we're here to try and change each other's mind so a half-ass intelligent conversation is possible. Would you agree?

So can you possess a 'religious' FAITH outside the framework of ANY of the organized disciplines constituted among Men? In this context lets say 'religious' is an adjective denoting a being of infinite intelligence, wisdom, and righteousness (oh, and no HUMAN attributes of any kind).

Mic, Man's capacity to analyze and draw conclusions about intangible ideas and concepts is never horseshit my Iriah friend!

Davius

[SeekNDestroy]

How about Buddhism? Where's the mind control and power in that?

[Doomer]

If God really did make man in his own image like the bible says then we are in deep deep doo doo. If God's nature and man's nature is one and the same then there is a hell and we will be tortured for eternity because we lived a life we did not choose to live.

Geeez, Hilter was much nicer.

[Moishe3rd]

Cuchulainn,
Wassup dog? I mean the legend reverberates with religion and mysticism and you say all religion is crap?? Well, I suppose from certain point of view, that could be very mystical.... :vbroll:

Religion is the allegiance you give to a set of ideas. Whether they are ideals or the road to hell depends very much on what You Want.

I would humbly suggest that without religion, life would be largely crap. And I personally believe that the world is much too wonderful for that...

G-d is real. It is man's relationship that is questionable...

[playmaker88]

I would humbly suggest that without religion, life would be largely crap. And I personally believe that the world is much too wonderful for that...


I don't have religion in my life and I'm very happy. My life certainly isn't crap. This planet is a beautiful place to be and I'm enjoying the ride while it lasts. No influences, no obstructions, just life for living and death.

[DaviusMaximus]

To All;

In Genisis It is said that God exclaimed the they(?): 'should make Man in our (?) own 'image." In Exodus 3-14 God answers Moses with the defining phrase: "IAM that I AM." Are these controdictory verses - NO! They're complimentary. Why?

To begin with Exodus, "I AM that I AM is a concept nothing more. When the predicate and the subject are the same you have a concept. God thus holds himself out to be a non-definible entity, nothiing nore, In Genisis it's states Man will be the same - and each of us is!

None of us can absolutely define who (the individual) we are; I can not give a full specific description of my "I". I AM not the man I was yesterday and I will not be the man tomorrow that I AM today. None of you can not either. My "I" is a concept nothiing more. Each of us is a continuous dynamic evolving personna that is constintly being modified through our complex social interactions.

The failure of the three Great Dogmas is that they center their beliefs aound the ego of Man rather the in the metaphyiscal nature of the cognitive creature he is. God does not and should no reveal himself defivitive in likeness of a Man.

Is this devise (Man's perception of God appearenceee being akind to the likeness of a man) is one of the main tools used by each of the Dogmas to controll the actions and perceptions of the faithfull.

Davius

[DaviusMaximus]

Is atheism contrary to the ISM of God?

Yes/No!

Yes if God is the humanized, emotional, greedy, destructive, murderous and genicidal manic depressive depicted by the Great Dogmas. If you cannot accept their description of God's nature then you must be defined as an atheist.

NO, if God is an infinite intelligence which acclaims an infinite wisdom residing in a state-of-being called rightousness. Then the individual recognizing these qualities of a Diety would not and could not give lip service to Superman while demeaning the dignity of God's rightousness

In short, an atheist, may recognize a Supreme Beig while opposing the Dogmas of the faithfull.

Davius

[Moishe3rd]

Playmaker88,
Again, I would humbly suggest that religion is the allegiance that you give to a set of ideas (which seem to become ideals).

If your life is fine without religion, then what is it you love?
If you love, then have you not religion?
If you love not, how is it that your life is fine?

(And, I'm serious. I'd be interested to know if you don't think you love and you think life is fine, what emotion do you think you feel? None? Indifference?)

[DarkAce]

Why do you attribute love with religion? One can experince, and give love without the need for religion. Unless of course you think religion is the only way one can learn morals and emotions.

[playmaker88]

Dictionary defintion

Religion

1 belief in or worship of a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny.

2 any formal expression of such belief: the christian religion

3 Chiefly Roman Catholic church the way of life entered upon by monks and nuns: to enter religion.

There are 11 listings for love that I can't be bothered to put here and not one mentions religion.

FYI I love my son, he was conceived when my partner and I had sex. Religion had nothing to do with it, God didn't create him, I planted the seed, my partner did the rest. Stick your blind-faith where the sun don't shine. We live happily together and we're not married (now what do you think of that oh holy one?)

[DaviusMaximus]

What is the meaning of "faith'. your definitiion, and on what basis do you come to that conclusion? This is a conceptional question and not necessarily a religious one.

Davius

[playmaker88]

What is the meaning of "faith'. your definitiion, and on what basis do you come to that conclusion? This is a conceptional question and not necessarily a religious one.

Davius

A strong belief in something, especially without proof. :thumbs:

[DontBeAfraid]

Davius your definition of an atheist is incorrect.

[evilwill]

Indeed it is. I find that this pretty much sums up the definition of an atheist.


Atheism is characterized by an absence of belief in the existence of gods. This absence of belief generally comes about either through deliberate choice, or from an inherent inability to believe religious teachings which seem literally incredible. It is not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.

Some atheists go beyond a mere absence of belief in gods: they actively believe that particular gods, or all gods, do not exist. Just lacking belief in Gods is often referred to as the "weak atheist" position; whereas believing that gods do not (or cannot) exist is known as "strong atheism".

[Moishe3rd]

FYI I love my son, he was conceived when my partner and I had sex. Religion had nothing to do with it, God didn't create him, I planted the seed, my partner did the rest. Stick your blind-faith where the sun don't shine. We live happily together and we're not married (now what do you think of that oh holy one?)
Well, it would interest me more if you detailed the seed planting process...
:kiss:
But, barring that, it sounds like a good thing to me.

I tend towards the 4th Mirriam Webster definition of religion:
a cause, principle, or belief held to with faith and ardor

Now, I suppose that that it is quite possible that you have no cause, principle, or belief held to with faith and ardor, but I find that difficult to believe...

I suspect that you believe the sun will be there tomorrow; that your "live happily together partner" will be there tomorrow; that your possible job, car, government, friends, or whatnot, will all be there tomorrow.
I would call that faith.

And, while it is quite possible that you scientifically dissect and hypothesize every possible action and reaction of all events during the day, I suspect that there are things you believe in such as love or human decency.

Perhaps you even hold to the obvious belief, with faith and ardor, that all of those who hold to a belief in G-d have their heads up their ass? Don't know. Just fishing here. But, I suspect you may believe that..... :vbroll:

[DarkAce]

I suspect that you believe the sun will be there tomorrow; that your "live happily together partner" will be there tomorrow; that your possible job, car, government, friends, or whatnot, will all be there tomorrow.
I would call that faith.


Some would call it probability.

[DaviusMaximus]

From what I've observed in my life, now 61 years, if your perceptions of God does not run the specifics of the sect-demonination or dogma that you specify those good folks would consider you an atheist. Now I will admit that that might not flow along the path of the dictionary's definition, but it will still be operative for the 'faithfull'.

The 'faithfull' are very hypocrictical in their belief system. If you think that wrong look at Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - each being the true faith. Yes Islam calls all three the 'children of the book' yet each gives the other two little more then acknowledgement.

All three, through their own dogmas, have and do consider that God is a babbling idoit, a biget, a hypocrite, a murderer, and a co-conspirator in genocide. God is immortal only the the extent that that characteristic fits their dogma's needs and not the metaphyscial concept. Be the faithfull Jxx-Chrxx, or Musxx, God is SuperMan and not a Deity. Digress from SuperMan and you become an atheist very quickly.

Davius

PS

If you think I'm wrong in my impressions then explain the diversions between the jew, the christian, and the muslim that exists. Same 'God', same authority, same law, same attributes but each willing to destroy the others in the 'name of God'. Sorry, but did God ask the gygote its sex, race, creed, nationality, body politics, economic ideaology, religious theology, ect before granting a soul - NO. The 'religions' and humankind sure do consider them though, don't we? Oh, I forgot - its a Man's world isn't it!

[DontBeAfraid]

anybody can call anybody an atheist..... that doesnt make them one.

[evilwill]

From what I've observed in my life, now 61 years, if your perceptions of God does not run the specifics of the sect-demonination or dogma that you specify those good folks would consider you an atheist.

That is plain ignorance on their part. As DBA said, it doesn't make them an atheist just because they say so.

[Moishe3rd]

Some would call it probability.

Indeed.
And I would call it probability that G-d exists and is indeed the Creator.
I base this probability on the problem of Creation or, as vee like to call it: zee Big Bang for your buck. A Force existing outside the universe is needed for the Bang to go Big.
And then there is Life and Man, both statistical impossibilities.
So, Occam's Razor says: Creator Dude!



All three, through their own dogmas, have and do consider that God is a babbling idoit, a biget, a hypocrite, a murderer, and a co-conspirator in genocide. God is immortal only the the extent that that characteristic fits their dogma's needs and not the metaphyscial concept. Be the faithfull Jxx-Chrxx, or Musxx, God is SuperMan and not a Deity. Digress from SuperMan and you become an atheist very quickly.

Oy, oy, oy....
No, I don't think so :bubble:

I am not saying that you must be interested in experimenting as to whether there is a G-d or not, but this is the Religion thread in the Religion forum, so the thoughts are obviously floating around in there somewhere.

So, why not give G-d as much benefit of the doubt as you do any other odd notion such as "Area 51;" or buying a ticket to win the lottery; or asking that really beautiful/handsome girl/guy out even though you are certain that your chances are zero....
G-d might be a bit more important....

So, if a person actually wanted to find out if G-d exists or not, one might try to verify or reject the notion by studying and testing the body of knowledge about which this claim of G-d is specialized.
If you want to understand geometry or physics, it would be equally as foolish to reject learning long division or simple chemistry on your journey as it would be to reject the geometry or physics texts and professors as being "irrelevant" and a waste of time.
In order to learn advanced physics, you have to want to learn advanced physics. And that means you have to go through all the steps to gain the knowledge to understand what advanced physics is and then go beyond that.

This is the truth whether it applies to learning about cooking; or computers; or G-d.

If you don't want to learn about G-d, then you simply reject the notion as too difficult or too irrelevant to your life (as I do with computer programming, for instance).
The end result is not that you have rejected the notion of G-d. You have rejected the study of G-d as being too difficult or too irrelevant to what you believe.
In other words, you have faith in your particular opinions and belief system and you'll be damned if you're going to crap it up with any further studies on what is actually true or not.

Or, to be even more prejudicial, you are loudly proclaiming that: My Belief System is the ONE; the ONLY; the TRUE Belief System and don't try and confuse me with the facts, you hypocritcal Religious person you!!

On the other hand, if a person wanted to find out the truth as to whether or not G-d exists, then one would have to study the texts.
Read the information.
Take notes.
Find a teacher.
Discuss the ideas.
Pursue the knowledge.
Experiment.
Apply the knowledge with practical experiments.
And, attempt to discover whether G-d exists.

Of course, if you aren't interested and don't want to know, then why bother?
There are some things I'm never going to learn because, I'm not interested.
Everything depends on what YOU WANT.

[playmaker88]

Perhaps you even hold to the obvious belief, with faith and ardor, that all of those who hold to a belief in G-d have their heads up their ass? Don't know. Just fishing here. But, I suspect you may believe that..... :vbroll:

No, just the ones who try to tell me what I should think, what my definition of love is, what my definition of happiness is, the preachers like you.

The fact that some people have a belief in God is quite natural. Good on them. It's just not me. Maybe the big bang theory is wrong, I don't know? Maybe a species that once created a God while looking for answers now finds the need to look for other explanations. I'm happy with my lot and am not seeking answers.

I have no need for religion. Those that do fine. Put forward your own views on this thread, afterall it's what the thread is for. Just don't try to tell the ones that don't their own minds. :spy:

[Moishe3rd]

G-d forbid that I should tell anyone what their mind is.
And G-d forbid that you should think, for some reason, that I am preaching :sleeping:
Ewwww....

I am, in my own insignificant manner, attempting to give over what I happen to believe is useful and true.
The questions I pose are simply questions.
And, I am sincere in my difficulty in understanding how anyone can claim to be without faith in whatever it is that they believe in.

According to Socrates, "The unexamined life is not worth living." (Apology 38a) His statement was a reflection on the fact that Athens wanted to kill him because he annoyed people by insisting on discussing what he considered the great issues of life...

:chopper:

[humanhybrid]

Moishe3rd why do you not use the o in god? You use - instead

[playmaker88]

Well, it would interest me more if you detailed the seed planting process...
:kiss:
But, barring that, it sounds like a good thing to me.


I suggest you go back to school and take some BASIC Biology lessons.

[playmaker88]

I am, in my own insignificant manner, attempting to give over what I happen to believe is useful and true.
The questions I pose are simply questions.
And, I am sincere in my difficulty in understanding how anyone can claim to be without faith in whatever it is that they believe in.

According to Socrates, "The unexamined life is not worth living." (Apology 38a) His statement was a reflection on the fact that Athens wanted to kill him because he annoyed people by insisting on discussing what he considered the great issues of life...


And I am "in my own insignificant manner" attempting to say that I have no need for religion in my life. Why do you find this so hard to comprehend? Is it because of the rules, regulations, beliefs (whatever people choose to call them) that govern your particular faith ask you to attempt to convert as many people as possible to your way of thinking? Do you want to make sure you tick all the little boxes before the time of reckoning? Am I putting the future of your soul in danger by refusing to accept your reasoning?

As for Socrates, great man though he probably was, he is not the authority on everything. As for Athens, sad individual who should have just ignored Socrates. Don't worry Moishe3rd, I have no desire to cause you any harm. Despite your silly little childish 'I am falling asleep, getting bored, etc. smilies.

[playmaker88]

I am not saying that you must be interested in experimenting as to whether there is a G-d or not, but this is the Religion thread in the Religion forum, so the thoughts are obviously floating around in there somewhere.

So, why not give G-d as much benefit of the doubt as you do any other odd notion such as "Area 51;" or buying a ticket to win the lottery; or asking that really beautiful/handsome girl/guy out even though you are certain that your chances are zero....
G-d might be a bit more important....

So, if a person actually wanted to find out if G-d exists or not, one might try to verify or reject the notion by studying and testing the body of knowledge about which this claim of G-d is specialized.
If you want to understand geometry or physics, it would be equally as foolish to reject learning long division or simple chemistry on your journey as it would be to reject the geometry or physics texts and professors as being "irrelevant" and a waste of time.
In order to learn advanced physics, you have to want to learn advanced physics. And that means you have to go through all the steps to gain the knowledge to understand what advanced physics is and then go beyond that.

Of course, if you aren't interested and don't want to know, then why bother?
There are some things I'm never going to learn because, I'm not interested.
Everything depends on what YOU WANT.

I read all the threads on this site and someone basically stated on this one that there is a need for a belief in God to be happy. That was worth a reply.

I do give God as much "benefit of the doubt" as I give Area 51, (in terms of all the intelligent extraterrestrial life stories) and I don't play the lottery (although in this country I understand if you buy just over 14,000,000 tickets and have a different sequence on each ticket then you are GUARANTEED to win the lottery jackpot FACT as there are only just over 14,000,000 solutions) as for asking the beautiful girl out (and she'll probably say no), she asked me and I said yes.

As for the last paragraph, "Everything depends on what YOU WANT." Thankyou, does this mean you are going to let me have my own mind now, instead of telling me that I must have faith and religion to love my son?

[humanhybrid]

http://www.rense.com/general53/theJesuslandingpad.htm White House Checked With Rapture Christians Before Latest Israel Move

[Doomer]

http://www.rense.com/general53/theJesuslandingpad.htm White House Checked With Rapture Christians Before Latest Israel Move

LOL, why am I not surprised.

Recently, I've entertained the thought that we may be headed towards another Dark Ages due to the onslaught of religion on enlightenment. If the bible and koran thumpers of the world have there way we are all in deep deep trouble.

[VegasRonin]

That article/page was so full of political bias, I couldn't discern the facts from the author's opinion. :bs:

[DaviusMaximus]

Dontbeafraid;

I agree with you. But most of the faithfull would consider anyone who would controdict the teachings of the 'dogma', whichever one you pick, an atheist. I consider their (pick one) opinioon of God is a "SuperMan' and not a true metaphysical cognitive Diety. God, for the most part, is a character whose compassion, love, and intelligence is needed to justify Man's inhumanity to his fellow Man and little more.

The statement is not meant to reject ot demean the righteousness of God just Man's hypocracy via his actions within this ism we call life.

Davius

[DaviusMaximus]

Please, I don't mean to imply that my personal ideas on the subject demand any consideration or reply from anyone. Yes faith is a singularity found within the universe of each individual's ism. Faith is not a group ot institutional code or conduct.

Personally, I find it hard to except a canned diatribe on God from an individual or a Book written by the hand of a man. The great religious texts for the most part are more of an enhansement of the human ego then the dignity of God's righteousness.

Davius

[Moishe3rd]

There is a question in Judaism whether or not G-d is one of the names of G-d
G-d has many different names in Judaism and one should not necessarily spell out the name of G-d except in prayer. It is accepted that one could use the name, G-d, in conversation, but in the same, most observant Jews would use the Hebrew name Hashem, which means The Name, as opposed to saying the Hebrew name of G-d in casual conversation.
The question is, is G-d's name G-d when it's not in Hebrew. The rabbis generally agree that it is better to leave out the O in G-d when writing it, as a sign of respect. That is, not to risk that one might be writing G-d's name.

Hey, y'all asked. I'm not saying it should make any sense to you. :vbroll:

In the meantime......
Yo, playmaker.... Geeeezz, you got a chip on your shoulder.
Love, live, laugh and be happy.
As I said, if you aren't interested and don't want to know, why bother?
I am simply awritin' on de religion thread of de religion board and expressing my own experiences.
And, the essence of everything I have been taught boils down to: it all depends on what you want.
And, quite frankly, I thought my explanation of how to discover whether or not G-d is real, was valid. If a person is interested. If not, as humanhybrid is wont to say "good day my friend."


Magician: Yes, what you want? Every man want something. One man want to be general. Another man want to masturbate in closet. This sound very crazy, but some man even want to be president. Is so. Some people have very strange tastes. Me, I want a glass of water. You have? Very thirsty.
--------From the play The Magician by Alexander Francis Horn
:wink:

[DontBeAfraid]

Are you offended when someone says or writes your name?

[mickydoolittle]

blah blah I'm a big moron blah blah

In other words, you have accomplished nothing aside from showing the rest of us here--that includes the slow ones, how ignorant you are concerning religion. You have added absolutely nothing to the growth of the discussion and above all you have done more to promote regression than any other single factor in today's world.

You claim to promote independent thought yet you consistantly post about remaining bound to your religious front that is of course not much better than the nazi ideals of old.

If you seriously want to peruse the notion of such an omnipotent being, then perhaps you need to re-think your concept of life in general.

Just for shits and giggles, try researching the basic fundamentals of biology.

mods, this is in response to #5. And yes, this moronic mother fuq'r deserves worse, yet didn't get it. . .hhmmm.

[evilwill]

Micky. Whether DaviusMaximus deserves it or not is irrelevant. The fact is that personal attacks against other members of this board is against the rules and won't be tolerated. You are pushing it and I'm sure you don't want to get banned again.

You're perfectly entitled to debate the side of an argument you wish, but refrain from insulting those that disagree with you.

[Doomer]

There is a question in Judaism whether or not G-d is one of the names of G-d
G-d has many different names in Judaism and one should not necessarily spell out the name of G-d except in prayer. It is accepted that one could use the name, G-d, in conversation, but in the same, most observant Jews would use the Hebrew name Hashem, which means The Name, as opposed to saying the Hebrew name of G-d in casual conversation.
The question is, is G-d's name G-d when it's not in Hebrew. The rabbis generally agree that it is better to leave out the O in G-d when writing it, as a sign of respect. That is, not to risk that one might be writing G-d's name.

Hey, y'all asked. I'm not saying it should make any sense to you. :vbroll:

In the meantime......
Yo, playmaker.... Geeeezz, you got a chip on your shoulder.
Love, live, laugh and be happy.
As I said, if you aren't interested and don't want to know, why bother?
I am simply awritin' on de religion thread of de religion board and expressing my own experiences.
And, the essence of everything I have been taught boils down to: it all depends on what you want.
And, quite frankly, I thought my explanation of how to discover whether or not G-d is real, was valid. If a person is interested. If not, as humanhybrid is wont to say "good day my friend."


:wink:

Hee Hee. Tropical fish enthusiasts always spell Pleco as Pl*co because it is thought that if you spell it out, your Pleco will die. Always wondered where that came from. Now I know. :D

[Marajadex]

Found in my E-Mail...

Subject: THE dRuNk


man is stumbling through the woods totally drunk when he comes upon a preacher baptizing people in the river. He proceeds to walk into the water and subsequently bumps into the preacher. The preacher turns around and is almost overcome by the smell of alcohol, whereupon he asks the drunk, "Are you ready to find Jesus?" The drunk answers, "Yes, I am." So the preacher grabs him and dunks him in the water. He pulls him up and asks the drunk, "Brother, Have you found Jesus?" The drunk replies, "No, I haven't found Jesus." The preacher shocked at the answer, dunks him into the water again for a little longer this time. He again pulls him out of the water and asks again, "Have you found Jesus, my brother?" The drunk again answers, "No, I haven't found Jesus." By this time the preacher is at his wits end and dunks the drunk in the water again---but this time holds him down for about 30 seconds and when he begins kicking his arms and legs he pulls him up. The preacher again asks the drunk, "For the love of God, have you found Jesus?" The drunk wipes his eyes and catches his breath and says to the preacher,"Are you sure this is where he fell in?

[DontBeAfraid]

Wow... I find that super amusing.... probably more than i should

[mickydoolittle]

blah blah blah blah the weaker (read as pussy) members are incapable of brutal bloodlust truth blah blah blah.


I refer you to click this link (http://forums.armageddononline.org/showthread.php?t=1635&page=6&pp=25) and see post #140.

Yeah....I am that great.

And dave, fuq you too.

[Moishe3rd]

Are you offended when someone says or writes your name?
What the hell; I realized the original explanation was somewhat incoherent, so I'll try again.

Under Jewish Law, the name of G-d, written or spoken, is considered holy.
Therefore, out of respect, we don't say G-d's name except when praying.

The analogy is similiar to not calling the King by his first name or, to be more American, not calling the President "Georgie" unless you were his friend in private conference with him.

Enough. :vbroll:

[Ghostrider ESP]

In the meantime......
Yo, playmaker.... Geeeezz, you got a chip on your shoulder.
Love, live, laugh and be happy.
As I said, if you aren't interested and don't want to know, why bother?
I am simply awritin' on de religion thread of de religion board and expressing my own experiences.
And, the essence of everything I have been taught boils down to: it all depends on what you want.
And, quite frankly, I thought my explanation of how to discover whether or not G-d is real, was valid. If a person is interested. If not, as humanhybrid is wont to say "good day my friend."


If anyone has a chip on their shoulder M3 it is you. PM88 has responded to every question you asked him. It is your inability to comprehend that someone can live their life and be happy without religion that is the continual 'spanner in the works' of the discussion between you two.

He (PM88) has quoted you and responded throughout to your questions and when he takes everything you have said and responds to your continual straw clutching you're finally left with no option but to say that he has a chip on his shoulder.

He has responded to you questions in the accepted quote and respond manner, how about you try some of that yourself on his last three (in my opinion very good points) responses to your questions and statements. Surely he deserves at least that much even if he doesn't agree and doesn't even like you or your opinions.

[playmaker88]

As I said, if you aren't interested and don't want to know, why bother?
I am simply awritin' on de religion thread of de religion board and expressing my own experiences.
And, the essence of everything I have been taught boils down to: it all depends on what you want.
And, quite frankly, I thought my explanation of how to discover whether or not G-d is real, was valid. If a person is interested.

I was only responding to your statement that "without religion, life would be largely crap" because I am without religion and my life is not crap.

I have since had the courtesy to answer questions you've thrown my way. If you don't want people who don't believe in G-d to contribute, don't make such ridiculous sweeping statements and if you're not interested in their responses, stop asking the people questions. :pray:

[Moishe3rd]

I was only responding to your statement that "without religion, life would be largely crap" because I am without religion and my life is not crap.
I have since had the courtesy to answer questions you've thrown my way. If you don't want people who don't believe in G-d to contribute, don't make such ridiculous sweeping statements and if you're not interested in their responses, stop asking the people questions.

Absolutelity Correct. I apologize.

I carried the crap analogy a little too far.
The original post was by Cuchulainn, which means "the hound of Culain." It's the story of a famous Irish champion called Setana, known as the Hound of Ulster who got his name because he killed Culain's hound. He then took on the responsibility of the guard dog and called himself Cuchulain.

It's a great legend and I thought that a poster who called himself by that name would have to have some respect for the more mystical traditions of things. And I therefore continued the "crap" analogy. You know, dogdoo... Anyway, it's now very lame....
:Bow:

[Defiant Noquisi]

Recently, I've entertained the thought that we may be headed towards another Dark Ages due to the onslaught of religion on enlightenment. Nope, we are headed towards the Dark Ages because people (of which most of their number are religous) freaked out over Janet Jackson's boob shot and are vigorously clamping down on anything they deem immoral. There is nothing enlightening about nekkid boobs. What would truly be enlightening and would spring closed minded individuals forward "into the light" would be for them to grow up and realize that it isnt nudity, speaking your mind, the clothes you wear or belief in religion that thrusts us into darkness. What does is the belief that one person or many people believe it neccessary to convince, recruit and/or subjugate everyone to their will because they think they are better

[playmaker88]

Nope, we are headed towards the Dark Ages because people (of which most of their number are religous) freaked out over Janet Jackson's boob shot and are vigorously clamping down on anything they deem immoral. There is nothing enlightening about nekkid boobs. What would truly be enlightening and would spring closed minded individuals forward "into the light" would be for them to grow up and realize that it isnt nudity, speaking your mind, the clothes you wear or belief in religion that thrusts us into darkness. What does is the belief that one person or many people believe it neccessary to convince, recruit and/or subjugate everyone to their will because they think they are better

Well put DN, you should talk to CF in 'Your own government doesn't trust you' on the 'conspiracy theory' section. It'd be nice for CF to have the input of a woman who knows what she's talking about.

As for M3, apologies and :respect: Despite how it may have seemed at the time it was good talking to you.

[DaviusMaximus]

Folks;

Some of you are atheist and that's fine, some are not and the same. But let me put forward a question purely on the philosophical level:

If God is "immortal" does G-d reside within the universe of cognitive reality? (Cognitive reality being the 'total' sum of all occurance possible within the relm of the knowable universe- including ALL human activity)

Taking this perception of 'reality' as true let me voice a definition of 'immortality':

A state of being before our reality (of the knowable universe) and which continues beyond the end of our reality (of the knowable universe).

If this definition could be held as reasonablly correct would it have an effect on the dogma of human religions? If so, what do you see as that effect(s)?

Davius

This is 'pure' philosophy my friends so you atheist need to answer the question too as stated and forget your inclination to disregard what you consider to be human ignorance.

[mickydoolittle]

This is 'pure' philosophy my friends so you atheist need to answer the question too as stated and forget your inclination to disregard what you consider to be human ignorance.

Well, I'm disregarding you as you are now on ignore. That's my way of dismissing human ignorance per the rules of this board. That means you no longer exist to micky. Welcome to my realm. Where's your god now? :devsmoke:

[Doomer]

ROTFLMAO :thumbs:

[mickydoolittle]

Well, I'm disregarding you as you are now on ignore. That's my way of dismissing human ignorance per the rules of this board. That means you no longer exist to micky. Welcome to my realm. Where's your god now? :devsmoke:

What a fantastic post. I'm going to drink to that! :toast:


Yes, I am indeed by own personal cheering section. Yea! :smokin:

[dutchie]

Well, your avatar does show your ability to auto-brownnose...
:rolling: :toast:

[mickydoolittle]

very clever Hans. :toast: