Random Insanity Alliance Forum, Mark V
Cactuar Zone => Random lnsanity => Topic started by: Shyox on April 25, 2007, 07:12:46 am
-
I've decided it would be best to separate myself from the traditional christianity as much as I can. My own beliefs will be shunned by its followers, and they're the largest hypocrites in the world, so I've decided I might as well stop calling myself a christian.
In Jesus' time, declaring yourself the son of god was a ludicrous idea. It goes against all of the religious doctrines that he based Christianity on. We used to think it was silly to read about kings and pharoahs who claimed themselves to be gods, but isn't that what Jesus did? He rebelled against the church, and created his own religion, and was killed for it.
...
Isn't that what's happening right now? With this whole homosexuality issue, the church is splitting apart. Organized religion was always a mean of controlling the people anyways, and in ways is still succeeding to tremendous extents. The Christians talk about following God and the bible, but the bible still has chapters talking about how to treat your slaves! Then they go out into the world, and persecute the blasphemists of their religion, for doing something different and keeping their own beliefs, doing EXACTLY what Jesus did. So, in conclusion, the old hippy down the street who smokes a blunt in his front yard everyday is closer to Jesus than the dad that goes to church every Sunday and is a hate-mongering homophobe. Christians have actually taken gay people and killed them by tying them to football goal posts! They practically crucify them!
A new age is dawning. The age of Traditional Christianity is nearing the end of its reign, and must make way for something else.
-
Jesus preached he was the Son of God, and that through him all could be saved. Xerxes, Pharoh's, etc. All said they were a "God". And all had some form of military campaign to slaughter everyone, and every single one failed. Jesus preached that he was the Son of God, and He died on the cross for our sins. He performed miracles none did before (Parting the red sea, just one of many.). He rose from the dead after being crucified, and promised to return again. All things no other "God" did before, as he really was the Son of God. Can the word of man produce the righteousness of God? These people, these "Churches" who blame, and judge everyone, and point fingers, and breach of judgement--Forget them all. Jesus preached love, kindness, /FORGIVENESS/, and mercy. These people who you said that kill, and all that--They aren't Christian. Neither is the hippy smoking the blunt. The Christians are the people who walk with Jesus, and know who he is, and what he's done for us. Who do not judge, and do not kill, but who pray for their enemies, are kind, and follow Jesus in their lives.
Jesus' church was held in Jerusalem, after his death and ressurection, I believe. It was actually made after he rose from the dead, witnessed to the final people, and then ascended into Heaven. Without that, there wouldn't be a church. Wheels and chariots can be found in the red sea, where it parted. Plates shifted in Jerusalem when he was crucified, as the Bible states. Jesus was NOT a blasphemer, Shy.
-
He performed miracles none did before (Parting the red sea, just one of many.)
Um...Moses much?
-
God helped him part the sea, Flask. Moses didn't have the power on his own. @_@ At least I hope not.
-
So Jesus and Moses did the same trick?
-
I apologize for wording one of the many miracles in the Bible wrong. =P I wasn't leaning more towards that Jesus himself did it, but more that it did happen. Just to give him an idea that these miracles did happen, but I worded it so it looked like Jesus did it.
God helped Moses part the Red sea. Chariots can be found in said sea, and were found. There are fish of all sorts on certain mountains fossilized (Flood.), plates moved in Jerusalem at the exact time of crucifiction. Sodom and Gommorah was found to the point where you can go there, my pastor actually has some parts of it and the rocks that fell. Jericho was found, since it was a castle in the right place, right time zone, with its walls fallen outward. Now, how can all those be true, and Jesus wasn't? Even Jesus himself performed many miracles. When he died the Veil of the temple split, thats like 5 foot thick. It can't just be torn like a tissue. He fed thousands with a bit of bread and fish, walked on water, he calmed the seas with just his words. Showing us that he is God, since the Earth was spoken into creation, and he spoke the weather to cease. Both books were thousands of years a part, that was not just a coincidence.
-
I'm a humanistic jew, so....yeah. *cough*
-
I'm an anti-religious atheist.
inb4"Atheism is a religion in and of itself!"
-
uh... how can Jesus blaspheme? He is God. I find the Jewish view kind of funny, actually... "Okay, we're looking for our savior, who's gonig to come from God and be God, and yet, every person who claims to be God we will kill." No insult to any Jews, but that's kind of funny to me.
So yeah, Jesus can't blaspheme because he is God. If God claims to be God, that's just telling the truth, isn't it? And Shy, those guys really aren't following Jesus the way they should be. They really aren't Christians. How do we know? Well, we can't really know for sure, until the rapture, at which time all fakers will be exposed. True Christians will want to follow God so much that they won't want to sin like those people.
-
uh... how can Jesus blaspheme? He is God. I find the Jewish view kind of funny, actually... "Okay, we're looking for our savior, who's gonig to come from God and be God, and yet, every person who claims to be God we will kill." No insult to any Jews, but that's kind of funny to me.
So yeah, Jesus can't blaspheme because he is God. If God claims to be God, that's just telling the truth, isn't it? And Shy, those guys really aren't following Jesus the way they should be. They really aren't Christians. How do we know? Well, we can't really know for sure, until the rapture, at which time all fakers will be exposed. True Christians will want to follow God so much that they won't want to sin like those people.
How do we know what God wants? His book was written by men. Whether or not they were inspired by divinities, it was written after the death of Jesus, and outside of Religious and Secular writings, it cannot even be proved that Jesus existed. The Council of Nicea decided what was put into the bible, and organized religion and translations have been made to control the minds of men.
And you're getting to my point for me, by saying Jesus can't blaspheme. How do we know that to move forward and evolve the religion is the wrong way to go?
And no one can explain to me why we still listen to a book that tells us how to treat our slaves, and stone people to death.
-
Shy, the council of Nicea did not choose what to put in th bible. That's a myth promoted in The DaVinci Code. That book's full of ox, there's just enough good stuff to make it look credible, but dig deeper on your own- it doesn't hold water. So please don't use anything from that.
And why do we listen to it? Because it was written by God. All scripture is God-breathed, hence, we should listen to it. I'm not going to argue that organized religion can control the minds of men, but true Christianity is not a religion- it is a relationship. "Religion" stems from a word that means "to bind back." Religion is man's attempt to bind himself to God. Jesus is God's attempt to get us to come to him. We don't need to bind ourselves to him, because he wants us.
Also, we have records of the Jesus' crucifixion order. And against any historical accuracy tests, the Bible holds water. It was not written after Jesus, for the most part. I'll admit that the entire New Testament was after Jesus. But the entire old testament was before him. And he fulfilled all of those prophecies. I'm sure you heard the odds of a single man fulfilling just a few of the messianic prophecies, so, thinking realistically, if someone came along that fulfilled all of them, it can't just be random chance, can it? Trust me, I don't do luck. God planned it that way.
Here's hoping that you talk to God about this. I'll pray for you about this. I pray that you will see the truth.
-
Shy, the council of Nicea did not choose what to put in th bible. That's a myth promoted in The DaVinci Code. That book's full of bull, there's just enough good stuff to make it look credible, but dig deeper on your own- it doesn't hold water. So please don't use anything from that.
And why do we listen to it? Because it was written by God. All scripture is God-breathed, hence, we should listen to it. I'm not going to argue that organized religion can control the minds of men, but true Christianity is not a religion- it is a relationship. "Religion" stems from a word that means "to bind back." Religion is man's attempt to bind himself to God. Jesus is God's attempt to get us to come to him. We don't need to bind ourselves to him, because he wants us.
Also, we have records of the Jesus' crucifixion order. And against any historical accuracy tests, the Bible holds water. It was not written after Jesus, for the most part. I'll admit that the entire New Testament was after Jesus. But the entire old testament was before him. And he fulfilled all of those prophecies. I'm sure you heard the odds of a single man fulfilling just a few of the messianic prophecies, so, thinking realistically, if someone came along that fulfilled all of them, it can't just be random chance, can it? Trust me, I don't do luck. God planned it that way.
Here's hoping that you talk to God about this. I'll pray for you about this. I pray that you will see the truth.
So you deny that not all documents claimed to be 'inspired by God' made it into the bible?
Also, it's pretty easy to fulfill prophecies when you're writing after they've been made. IF the scripture is God-Breathed, then why does it talk about STONING people and Having slaves!?!?!
Show me proof of the records that wasn't unearthed by the catholic church.
-
Shy, the bible isn't meant to be taken literally at all times. Also, The Council of Nicea decided which "God-inspired" works fit with the church's teachings of God and Jesus. Have you heard of the Gospel of Thomas? It "described" Jesus's life as a kid, but it said that he brought dead crows back to life and hit his friends with lightning bolts. The Council decided not to put it in because it didn't go with the teachings of Jesus.
Simply put Shy, just because some says that it was inspired by God, it doesn't mean that it actually was.
-
The Word of Man, and Word of God are two very different things. The Da vinci code is a myth, and a theory. One that I don't care about. Anyway, the ideas and chances of the Bible being fake is fake in and of itself. All the books in the Bible were written over hundreds of years, by different people. Wasn't it the book of John that was written on a stranded island? Yeah. Anyway as said, the Word of Man is garbage, and farce when put against the cross. The Cruades for Jesus? Inquisition? ox. All of it. I'm sure Jesus wept at them all, and was torn in half. Just because someone says its God inspired doesn't mean it is. If it does not produce love, kindness, growth, and strength, but instead death, broken hearts and war, it is not of God.
-
Shy, the bible isn't meant to be taken literally at all times. Also, The Council of Nicea decided which "God-inspired" works fit with the church's teachings of God and Jesus. Have you heard of the Gospel of Thomas? It "described" Jesus's life as a kid, but it said that he brought dead crows back to life and hit his friends with lightning bolts. The Council decided not to put it in because it didn't go with the teachings of Jesus.
Simply put Shy, just because some says that it was inspired by God, it doesn't mean that it actually was.
Then I got my point across perfectly. The Council decided which works went into the bible, they created the christian faith.
The Word of Man, and Word of God are two very different things. The Da vinci code is a myth, and a theory. One that I don't care about. Anyway, the ideas and chances of the Bible being fake is fake in and of itself. All the books in the Bible were written over hundreds of years, by different people. Wasn't it the book of John that was written on a stranded island? Yeah. Anyway as said, the Word of Man is garbage, and farce when put against the cross. The Cruades for Jesus? Inquisition? Bull. All of it. I'm sure Jesus wept at them all, and was torn in half. Just because someone says its God inspired doesn't mean it is. If it does not produce love, kindness, growth, and strength, but instead death, broken hearts and war, it is not of God.
Then the entire bible is shite then, is that what you're telling me?
Then how do we know he even existed? Where are the records of him being crucified? As far as my knowledge goes, I was under the impression there were none.
-
Actually, I'm going to declare myself as a Christian, and declare the rest of you heretics.
...
It seems the best course of action in accordance to my beliefs.
-
Shy, you're never going to find the truth if you're bent against it.
Evidence: http://answering-islam.org/Silas/crucified.htm (http://answering-islam.org/Silas/crucified.htm)
Can't get much more real then that. And what I was saying was answering your first arguement, saying "The church" kills gay people, judges this and hates that--God does not support that. Jesus' message was never hate, or pain. Do not get the word of Man mixed up with the Word of God.
http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/_christia...f_the_bible.htm (http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/_christian/_articles/authenticity_of_the_bible.htm)
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=592 (http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=592)
If you believe the Bible is junk, then how did it come to be? How did it spread around the world, even if but a few in a council put it together? Or if one man wrote it? How could people hundreds of years apart aim the same message (Predictions, and then happenings and miracles of Jesus Christ.) Some proofs that the miracles in the Bible are true:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=33168 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33168) (Red sea)
http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm (http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm) (Sodom and gommorah)
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a011.html (http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a011.html) (Jericho.)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...7_noahsark.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/04/0427_040427_noahsark.html) (Noah's ark, and flood.)
Etc etc. Those words in the Bible are true (How could one or even just ten or fifteen men get all those facts right, plus all the ones I didn't mention. They'd have to travel around the world. Try doing that with a horse.), so why is Jesus fake?
-
Shy, you're never going to find the truth if you're bent against it.
Evidence: http://answering-islam.org/Silas/crucified.htm (http://answering-islam.org/Silas/crucified.htm)
Can't get much more real then that. And what I was saying was answering your first arguement, saying "The church" kills gay people, judges this and hates that--God does not support that. Jesus' message was never hate, or pain. Do not get the word of Man mixed up with the Word of God.
http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/_christia...f_the_bible.htm (http://www.africanaquatics.co.za/_christian/_articles/authenticity_of_the_bible.htm)
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=592 (http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=592)
If you believe the Bible is junk, then how did it come to be? How did it spread around the world, even if but a few in a council put it together? Or if one man wrote it? How could people hundreds of years apart aim the same message (Predictions, and then happenings and miracles of Jesus Christ.) Some proofs that the miracles in the Bible are true:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=33168 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33168) (Red sea)
http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm (http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm) (Sodom and gommorah)
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a011.html (http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a011.html) (Jericho.)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...7_noahsark.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/04/0427_040427_noahsark.html) (Noah's ark, and flood.)
Etc etc. Those words in the Bible are true (How could one or even just ten or fifteen men get all those facts right, plus all the ones I didn't mention. They'd have to travel around the world. Try doing that with a horse.), so why is Jesus fake?
I never said he was fake, I said it cou;dn't be proved. If you notice, that site doesn't list its sources.
As for the Noah's Ark one, that article was from 2004. I guess they never found it. I don't see how the rest prove anything other than catastrophes.
Other people have predicted things as well that have happened, who were not Christians, and were of what were called 'heathen' religions.
Believing the bible is false has NOTHING to do with not believing how it came to be, I'm not seeing your logic at all. I never said one man wrote it either. However, believing some Council put it together and changed things for their own doings isn't really a big stretch. The religion was already VERY popular by that time.
Jesus' message was never hate, or pain. Do not get the word of Man mixed up with the Word of God.
I've been trying to convince you guys of this the entire time. You shouldn't trust the bible, why do we need a book telling us how to live? Whether or not Jesus was real or actually the messiah, it doesn't matter! It doesn't matter if he was the son of God or the son of man! I don't give a FLYING FARK if he was divine or not! Why does he have to be God in order to help us to be better people? Why can't he be a man who fought and died for what he believed in, only to have it torn apart and misconstrewed by some random bastards after his time?
Does it really matter whether he's the son of God or not? How is Christianity any different from other religions? They have proof of their miracles and other things too! You people were raised to believe in God, so you do.
I'm telling you that I am a Christian because of the principles that were laid down, not because of some damn holy ghost or because of miracles.
-
You cannot call yourself Christian, and denounce Jesus in such a way. Why does it matter? Why? Because the lesson he gives us, the lesson of redemption, peace, following him. He promises us the best life we can have, and have seen that proven right time and again, if we but bend our knee to him. He is there, working in our lives, giving us all the chances to spread his word and to grow as he can. I live with Jesus because I want to. I'm actually against most organized religion, and have many opinions on things like that. Why I give a fist about that book, is because its helped me through my life. God has always been there for me, and has always helped me. The lessons he gives, and the wisdom he provides is incredible. I need that book because without it, I would fall into sin, and would forget the right path. I need a good book to tell me how to live, because everyone around me isn't too good at that. "Drink beer, sex, women, money, power!" Screw that! I would be lost in five years without the Bible, and Jesus. Man's take on life is nothing but stupidity to me. Money? The nice car and big house? I would much rather have salvation, thanks.
It matters if he's the son of God or not. If he is, he is what he says. If he isn't, then there is no point in Christianity. Christianity is different because he rose from the dead, promises us Salvation, and defeated death. No other "God" did that.
That damned holy ghost died for you on the cross, layed down those principles you follow, and loves you, Shy. Without him, there is no 'Christ'ianity.
-
And really, what does it matter? Jesus lived his life of Light, died for us, and rose again. He didn't hop on the cross, and close his eyes. He was whipped, tormented, and torn apart. Had his arms and legs broken, stuck on a cross to die of sufication. While he was being nailed to the very cross he would die on, did he not say "Forgive them, they do not know!"? Jesus lived his life for us, and he wants us to do the same. He promises us a shelter, strength, wisdom, and growth in Him. He gives us redemption, and courage. Who are we to have this salvation? We murder, steal, kill, pillage, recruit, sin. We kill babies, we nuke nations, and he died for /us/. I am forever grateful of that. And he knew it from the beginning, too. He made the earth--The tree to make the cross, the leather for the whips. And he still did it. Incredible.
That damned holy spirit can save lives, and souls, Shy. He is the light when it is nothing but dark. He can set us free, and destroy the chains on us. You have to remember Shy, if you want proof or facts or whatever, talk to God. Don't just blow up in the wind, pray to God for answers, and a path. If you want proof, you're going to have to ask him himself. He will provide proof, and facts. Be it in one minute, or one century. Jesus promises that much to answer your prayers. And I will pray for you, Shy. That you find Jesus. I must go to bed, goodnight comrade.
-
You cannot call yourself Christian, and denounce Jesus in such a way. Why does it matter? Why? Because the lesson he gives us, the lesson of redemption, peace, following him. He promises us the best life we can have, and have seen that proven right time and again, if we but bend our knee to him. He is there, working in our lives, giving us all the chances to spread his word and to grow as he can. I live with Jesus because I want to. I'm actually against most organized religion, and have many opinions on things like that. Why I give a fist about that book, is because its helped me through my life. God has always been there for me, and has always helped me. The lessons he gives, and the wisdom he provides is incredible. I need that book because without it, I would fall into sin, and would forget the right path. I need a good book to tell me how to live, because everyone around me isn't too good at that. "Drink beer, sex, women, money, power!" Screw that! I would be lost in five years without the Bible, and Jesus. Man's take on life is nothing but stupidity to me. Money? The nice car and big house? I would much rather have salvation, thanks.
It matters if he's the son of God or not. If he is, he is what he says. If he isn't, then there is no point in Christianity. Christianity is different because he rose from the dead, promises us Salvation, and defeated death. No other "God" did that.
That damned holy ghost died for you on the cross, layed down those principles you follow, and loves you, Shy. Without him, there is no 'Christ'ianity.
I disagree entirely. If Jesus knew he was going to raise from the dead, then it wasn't quite as noble a thing as people think. If he was divine, then it wouldn't matter if he died or not, because he was immortal. Plenty other gods have defeated death in their own myths, plenty have risen from the dead, and all too many promise salvation.
It means SO MUCH more, the sacrifice so much greater, if he was a mortal man.
That's where you're too blind to see. You're doing everything for yourself, for salvation. You're devoting your life to something in order to get something in return. Wouldn't it be so much more noble a thing to do something... Just because? Because you strive to be a better person, and better yourself? Why must their be some spooky tale that frightens us into gulping down religion?
I'm not denouncing Jesus, I'm making him more noble by making him human, and far more understanding and greater than what the christian faith has turned him into.
-
Who said he wasn't human? He was the Son of God. He wasn't immortal, didn't feel no pain. He had abilities from God, and blessings from God. None on his own accord. Shy, you're standing on a field. On the other side of it, is pure happiness. Problem is, the field is a mine field, has lion traps, and spike pits in it. Now go get that happiness! Doesn't matter if you know the ending, that is going to suck. And he still did it. He knew the ending, knew the torment, and he still did it.
Hardly. You're calling me blind and selfish? I want to make people happy. I want people to be blessed, I want to be able to share God's word with them, which is true happiness. I am striving to be a better person, but with Jesus, because he created me, and everything. If I follow His will, I will grow. I have seen this all too many times proven true, so do not call me a liar or blind. Its not a spooky tale to me, its a wonderful story of a man stepping down, dying for our sins, and giving us redemption. But you think he's a blasphemer. Lets say he was. Boy was he a selfish, ignorant magician. All he did was praise God, try to help everyone he could, died for them, rose again. All he did was give people redemption, and testimony. A reason to live then. All he did was save lives. Curse him! The selfish saints that persecuted him did so because he "Broke their temple rules.". They brought false witnesses against him, and he was crucified by Pilate, who knew he was an innocent and strong man. But he crucified him because he did not want an uprising in Jerusalem against the Romans. Jesus could have left, stood on his own side, or just killed them all probably. He didn't, he kept his mouth shut, and talked to God, and still did it.
What a selfish man Jesus was.
-
at some point, Shy, you have to stop asking for proof and facts and just believe. That's what faith is. And you seem to be using that word quite a bit.
Also, how is making him man making him any better? If he was man, then he was sinful. But he WAS man. Do you not read? He was fully God and fully man, as much as that blows our minds. Back to being man, he was dead for three days, likely suffering in Hell for us, and for a holy person, being around that much sin is like dying a thousand deaths a second. Making Jesus pure human does not make him more noble; it simply denies a key aspect of his character.
This is not a religion. I hate when people call it that. It's a relationship. "Religion" means "to bind back" in its original language. Religion is man's attempt to bind himself to God. But the Lord said, "No, you do not bind yourself to me. I call you to me." So he sent Jesus to ransom us from the pits of hell.
Also, everyone, no matter what, is never completely altruistic. It's not possible. But there is more than selfish desire for salvation: when we accept Jesus, we accept God as our ruler. We are, as Paul says, slaves to him. Once we do that, we serve the one who created the universe, and is there a higher calling than that? We do God's will when we come to him through Jesus.
-
All the books in the Bible were written over hundreds of years, by different people. Wasn't it the book of John that was written on a stranded island? Yeah.
From what I remember, historians think that the four gospels weren't written directly written by the people, but instead they were probably written by Matthew's, Mark's, Luke's, and John's disciples. John's bible supposedly being the latest.
-
at some point, Shy, you have to stop asking for proof and facts and just believe. That's what faith is. And you seem to be using that word quite a bit.
I'm sorry for double-posting, but as soon as I read this matt, I had to agree with you. As a Catholic studying my faith with my father, I have learned many things that I did not know before. Faith being one of them. It's called the "Mystery of Faith" for a reason. A mystery is when we know part of the story, but not everything. We know part of God's will and who God is, but yet we do not know everything. That is mystery; faith is trusting in God even when you're not sure what will happen by living the life that he has called you to live.
-
amen.
-
I've decided it would be best to separate myself from the traditional christianity as much as I can. My own beliefs will be shunned by its followers, and they're the largest hypocrites in the world, so I've decided I might as well stop calling myself a christian.
In Jesus' time, declaring yourself the son of god was a ludicrous idea. It goes against all of the religious doctrines that he based Christianity on. We used to think it was silly to read about kings and pharoahs who claimed themselves to be gods, but isn't that what Jesus did? He rebelled against the church, and created his own religion, and was killed for it.
...
Isn't that what's happening right now? With this whole homosexuality issue, the church is splitting apart. Organized religion was always a mean of controlling the people anyways, and in ways is still succeeding to tremendous extents. The Christians talk about following God and the bible, but the bible still has chapters talking about how to treat your slaves! Then they go out into the world, and persecute the blasphemists of their religion, for doing something different and keeping their own beliefs, doing EXACTLY what Jesus did. So, in conclusion, the old hippy down the street who smokes a blunt in his front yard everyday is closer to Jesus than the dad that goes to church every Sunday and is a hate-mongering homophobe. Christians have actually taken gay people and killed them by tying them to football goal posts! They practically crucify them!
A new age is dawning. The age of Traditional Christianity is nearing the end of its reign, and must make way for something else.
What "christianity" was and has been based on the Idea of the son of God. Within the Entire Torah there are examples of God calling himself son of man/ God or the idea of a God messiah.
I will compile a list when im not so tired.
A flaw is that you fail to see that Christianity and Jesus have been Jewish, not this idea of a new religion, but of an old one. Jesus did not "start" a new religon but fullfilled the plans for an old one, Judaism. He Did not rebel against the church seeing as how he started the church to continue his work until he returned and the temple would be rebuilt.( The word "church" comes from the Greek word eklesia meaning The gathering). Originally the church was just a bunch of Jews who met on the sabbath(saturday) and again after Havdalah or on Sunday. Then they were kicked out by a proclamation by the non-believing Jews, So they had no other choice but to continue worship on Saturday within their own synoguge ( greek for the assembly). Until CONstitine, the so called christian, changed it to Sunday to honor Apollo.
The pharisees were political puppets of the day. Rome was afraid of anyone besides the Roman emporer commanding the respect of large bodies of people, weather it be chiefs,prophets or the messiah. Tacitus (writing at the beginning of the second century A.D.) reports: "There was a firm persuasion ... that at this very time the East was to grow powerful, and rulers coming from Judea were to acquire a universal empire." If you look at Jesus's trial everything about it was illegal under Jewish law. He was not killed because he was a blasphemer but because he was an enemy of the state.
The Christians talk about following God and the bible, but the bible still has chapters talking about how to treat your slaves! Then they go out into the world, and persecute the blasphemists of their religion, for doing something different and keeping their own beliefs, doing EXACTLY what Jesus did.
Slavery was a big part of life back then, It is not slavery as we think it today. It was a from of punishment. Many also found becoming a slave to a rich master better then living on their own, knowing full well that they would be taken care of. You have to think life then was diffrent from life today. It was harsh and it was not often guaranteed where you would get your next meal. The laws over slaves are actually to prevent creualty. One of the reason many went into servitude to just masters, Like after 7 years law commands that a salve be set free. Don't Judge the teachings of Jesus based on Man. Remember, people suck! IF you apply the high standard you expect christians to have to every principle or religion in the world you would still have imperfection, a lot of it. The bible teaches not to judge the sawdust in peoples eyes when you have a plank in your own. ( One of the reasons he hated the pharasees). This is what Jesus teaches. Not to judge but let God almighty who is without sin Judge.
So, in conclusion, the old hippy down the street who smokes a blunt in his front yard everyday is closer to Jesus than the dad that goes to church every Sunday and is a hate-mongering homophobe. Christians have actually taken gay people and killed them by tying them to football goal posts! They practically crucify them!
A new age is dawning. The age of Traditional Christianity is nearing the end of its reign, and must make way for something else.
I agree with this statement somewhat, as long as the hippy followed Jesus. Traditional Christianity must make way for God. I feel that he is revealing a truth that was lost to his people so long ago. People all across the world are seeing that many so called christians are fake and hate-mongering. The world I believe is tired of this Image and I believe God is too.
-
You guys aren't going to be able to understand my views, and I can't convince you too.
I don't have time to argue right now, so lemme try again tomorrow.
Peace.
-
I think we are able to understand them, they're just incorrect according to the Bible, and therefore we attempt to refute them and bring you back to the Way.
-
YOur ideas are not stupid. Its just that You came to them under some misinformation.
-
I don't understand the point in arguing then. I'm glad you guys have your faith, I am, but I just can't agree with the bible until some things change.
-
this is why i think religion is outdated.
-
I don't understand the point in arguing then. I'm glad you guys have your faith, I am, but I just can't agree with the bible until some things change.
I was not arguing, just sorta conversing.
-
this is why i think religion is outdated.
That's why I can't wait for the sequel.
Bible 2: Satan Strikes Back!
-
Again, I say it again, and I'll probably have to say it again, but Christianity is NOT a religion. It is a relationship between God and you.
-
w/e then you and god are outdated.
-
well, then, in the immortal words of Captain Solo, "I'll see you in Hell."
-
...from heaven
-
correct.
-
You cannot call yourself Christian, and denounce Jesus in such a way. Why does it matter? Why? Because the lesson he gives us, the lesson of redemption, peace, following him. He promises us the best life we can have, and have seen that proven right time and again, if we but bend our knee to him. He is there, working in our lives, giving us all the chances to spread his word and to grow as he can. I live with Jesus because I want to. I'm actually against most organized religion, and have many opinions on things like that. Why I give a fist about that book, is because its helped me through my life. God has always been there for me, and has always helped me. The lessons he gives, and the wisdom he provides is incredible. I need that book because without it, I would fall into sin, and would forget the right path. I need a good book to tell me how to live, because everyone around me isn't too good at that. "Drink beer, sex, women, money, power!" Screw that! I would be lost in five years without the Bible, and Jesus. Man's take on life is nothing but stupidity to me. Money? The nice car and big house? I would much rather have salvation, thanks.
It matters if he's the son of God or not. If he is, he is what he says. If he isn't, then there is no point in Christianity. Christianity is different because he rose from the dead, promises us Salvation, and defeated death. No other "God" did that.
That damned holy ghost died for you on the cross, layed down those principles you follow, and loves you, Shy. Without him, there is no 'Christ'ianity.
I disagree entirely. If Jesus knew he was going to raise from the dead, then it wasn't quite as noble a thing as people think. If he was divine, then it wouldn't matter if he died or not, because he was immortal. Plenty other gods have defeated death in their own myths, plenty have risen from the dead, and all too many promise salvation.
It means SO MUCH more, the sacrifice so much greater, if he was a mortal man.
That's where you're too blind to see. You're doing everything for yourself, for salvation. You're devoting your life to something in order to get something in return. Wouldn't it be so much more noble a thing to do something... Just because? Because you strive to be a better person, and better yourself? Why must their be some spooky tale that frightens us into gulping down religion?
I'm not denouncing Jesus, I'm making him more noble by making him human, and far more understanding and greater than what the christian faith has turned him into.
When Jesus was crucified atthat point he was titakky seperated fron God hsi father, it was teh act of a mortal to suffer pain and die for our sins, at that moment and in teh trrial leading up to his death Jesus had the free will to deny his father and live and he chose not to to fulfil his role in life
-
Well, I disagree with a lot that has been said, but my faith isn't gone from me completely. I'm a different kind of Christian than you guys are, but I still am one. This past week has put some new things in my head, for sure.
-
what is your faith in now, if you haven't lost it?
-
I believe in a higher power. I'm not agnostic, because I still believe in some Christian principles. However, I disagree with a lot of it, and I've been exiled. The Church does not allow for progressive thinking, like mine, because otherwise it would be impossible to control what people believed. It doesn't matter to me whether or not there is an afterlife, I'm following through with my faith because I believe that one man made a tremendous sacrifice. I believe he had some great ideas, but that they're now terribly misconstrewed and aren't doing him justice.
To me, Jesus is just as much a symbol of my faith as he is a person.
-
*scratches head* but you don't believe in Jesus as Messiah?
-
*scratches head* but you don't believe in Jesus as Messiah?
I just don't it matters whether or not he's the messiah.
-
why not?
-
why not?
It's just not the reason I have faith, is all.
-
Then what do you have faith in?
-
That a man died as a testament to what he believed in, and was a revolutionary thinker. I also believe that God must have blessed him in some way, and he might even had been God's son. He gave the ultimate sacrifice, when he easily could have started a revolution and become a king. But he didn't. He chose peace, and continued to live his life by a set of good ideas.
-
Thats what we believe, too. Just add one thing: He died for our salvation. Thats really what we believe too, Shy.
-
and in this case, Shy, it can make an eternity of a difference.
-
All that you're proving is that religion is a blind leap of faith into a giant pool of the unkown... What shy has been saying this ENTIRE time is that NOTHING is supported by hard facts, other then a book that (I agree with him on this) was written by men who said they talked to God. Keeping that in mind, it is hard to actually come up with any true evidence, so those who believe will go on believing because it is natural to them, and those who choose to question authority will question it... I find arguing with any member of a church utterly pointless, no matter how much logic you throw at them it falls on deaf ears. It is not because they are stupid, or refuse to listen to reason (if you can call it that, it all has to do with point of view) but rather that, when speaking on the topic of religion, none of it can be proven or disproved with the application of knowledge... why?? because religion is literally mysticism and is meant to be unreal, to the point where we could never be able to accomplish such tasks, but in the same sense real enough that it is within the realm of possibility that a being so superior actually exists... I believe in God, I believe he is the answer to the question how... I do not however believe that he bore a son to die for our sins, because it doesn't make sense... Why did he choose that time?? What was so wrong with the world that we needed spiritual cleansing then?? If you look at the world today, we are much worse off then back then, so why not now?? and if not now why not get it out of the way when humans first started to take their first stumbling steps in the evolutionary chain?? I also despise religions for the same fake aspect... The religions are bitter mirrors of each other, each claiming that if you follow the other, you're going to hell, and only they can save you. They are constantly trying to recruit more "followers" and grow more and more powerful and influential, and all their horrors they commit, they hide behind God (the crusades, the witch burnings, bombing of abortion clinics, suicidal bombers, jihads, etc.) and say it is for him. It has become a mass hypnosis, everyone ignores the word of God, which is right in front of him, and listens to the old man in a dress, and they assume he is leading them correctly... It will be a sad day when someone truly corrupt (I say truly because in respect, all humans are corrupt) takes the reigns as "religious leader" and begins some large scale holy war to eradicate the "philistines," which, if you think about it, doesn't seem that unlikely (all we need is a Hitler type to take control), and you will all follow blindly, because that is what you've been taught. God exists, follow Him blindly. Jesus died for you, follow him blindly. Your religion represents both, follow it blindly....
-
and in this case, Shy, it can make an eternity of a difference.
It's not like he can force himself to believe something.
-
that is true, but my statement still stands.
And Jesus' sacrifice was not just for his time period, but for all who come after him as well. I do not blindly follow, I have been gifted with a scientific mind, and I have examined the evidence, and I have come to a conclusion. Nothing can sway me from my position any longer.
-
"they hide behind God (the crusades, the witch burnings, bombing of abortion clinics, suicidal bombers, jihads, etc.)"
You give me proof that God, not man, supported those times, and I'll agree with you.
-
And to go on, most of your statement is kicking man in the shins. They hide behind God, they do this, they accuse that. Is God doing that? No. "They do not like me because they do not know me." I believe a verse in the Bible is. Now, say you were a business man, right? You have some people who tell others about you. When those people hide behind you, and lie, and kill, and cheat, and break, did you support it? No! It was their own actions. Does the word of Man produce the righteousness of God? In those cases, no. Our walk with God is hardly dictated by the Words of men, so long as they aren't just. I follow God, and his call. Blindly? No. I think everyone needs a Leader--A hero. Jesus is mine, and he has saved me many times in my life. The Crusades, rules and strictness of Man hardly works against my faith, or for it. I believe because it is the logical choice for me. The thoughts of evolution and Godlessness is all a shot in the dark, and a pointless one for me. So, why are we presuming this life is mean't to have a life /without/ someone to love us, and to watch over us, and to protect us again? Why do we not want there to be God? Because people do not know him. They think because tonice Urban II launched the peoples crusade, for instance, that God is violent, but God did not cause that war, tonice Urban II did. The whole Hell thing is indeed in most, if not all, religions. But, if that is the reason you're Christian, you need to get your act back together. If someone starts their lesson on why to follow Jesus on Hell, they need to smack themselves.
-
I wasn't attacking God WTP, which is why I said I believe in him in the very beginning, however, I was attacking religion that people claim to be following by his word... everything there is a slam against organized religion, which I believe ruins faith... and invincible, if you would please enlighten me with your "scientific mind" and tell me what evidence is actually backed up by fact, not including the bible which is a work of man, not God... and saying that they talked to God really doesn't count, if I wrote a bible and said God told me too, would you follow it, would you even believe me??
-
Thats like asking you to support evolution with books, or math, or science itself. First, prove that its not the Word of God.
-
Thats like asking you to support evolution with books, or math, or science itself. First, prove that its not the Word of God.
But you CAN support Evolution with books and Science. @.@
Umm... It was written by men who had in their hands the power to take control of Christianity for years to come. Obviously many of their own ideas are in there.
-
First, prove that its not the Word of God.
What would it take for me to prove it's not the word of god?
I can prove parts of the Bible aren't true. The Bible claims that the sky is a solid firmament with windows in it that angels open and close to make it rain. Since the development of space travel we can pretty firmly say there is no firmament. Surely God knows there's no firmament there, so why is it in the Bible?
-
I've honestly never heard of that in any of the books in the Bible. @_@ Ever. And the Bible is very symbolic, I doubt it was literal. A literal beast isn't going to come out of the sea, ala Revelations, its symbolism.
-
let's see... Kings, for one, is backed up by archaeological evidence. The archaeologists didn't think these guys existed, go dig where the bible tells them to, and lo and behold, there is the evidence! I never said God wrote the bible. I believe that the Bible is God-inspired, a la 2 Timothy. We know Jesus was real, know he was crucified, and it cannot be disproved that he rose again. That, right there, is all that needs to be disproven to destroy Christianity in its entirety- the Resurrection of Christ. I dare you to try. In the words of one of our own, "I wish more people would try to disprove the resurrection of Christ. If they did, there would be a lot more Christians!"
-
Thats like asking you to support evolution with books, or math, or science itself. First, prove that its not the Word of God.
But you CAN support Evolution with books and Science. @.@
Umm... It was written by men who had in their hands the power to take control of Christianity for years to come. Obviously many of their own ideas are in there.
I have one question though. Why is it that the beginning of Genisis where God is making the earth so similar to the theory of evolution? I mean, the orders are so similar I'm surprised anyone can argue.
-
similar, but the moving factor is different. Some entertain the thought that God made evolution and set it into motion after he created species, fully knowing what would come of it.
-
I've honestly never heard of that in any of the books in the Bible. @_@ Ever. And the Bible is very symbolic, I doubt it was literal. A literal beast isn't going to come out of the sea, ala Revelations, its symbolism.
In Genesis, during the second day.
[!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Genesis 1:6-8, NAB)--][div class=\'quotetop\']QUOTE (Genesis 1:6-8, NAB)[div class=\'quotemain\'][!--quotec--]Then God said, "Let there be a dome in the middle of the waters, to seperate one body of water from the other." And so it happened: God made the dome, and it seperated the water above the dome from the water below it. God called the dome "the sky." Evening came, and morning followed -- the second day[/quote]
Later God attaches the sun and moon to the dome. The windows (my bible calls them floodgates) are mentioned in the story of Noah.
-
actually, this "dome" your bible mentions could actually be the atmosphere, when God creates it to protect us from space. The two bodies of "water" would then be the actual earth and space, which makes sense.
Also, you have to realize that what your bible says is not exactly what the Bible, in its original state, exactly meant, because of language differences, you know. For example, after his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times "Do you love me?" and Peter answered, "Yes, Lord, I love you." In English the word "love" is the same, but in its original Greek, Jesus uses a different word for love than Peter does the first two times. Some of the translations are different than others, so there's some room to try and interpret what is actually meant. You also have to realize that this was written thousands of years before Astronomy, so its possible that God made it understandable to the people of the time who would read it instead of baffling them with the way things really were.
The Bible makes many references to the "Floodgates of Heaven." It's probably a figurative thing.
-
actually, this "dome" your bible mentions could actually be the atmosphere, when God creates it to protect us from space. The two bodies of "water" would then be the actual earth and space, which makes sense.
Also, you have to realize that what your bible says is not exactly what the Bible, in its original state, exactly meant, because of language differences, you know. For example, after his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times "Do you love me?" and Peter answered, "Yes, Lord, I love you." In English the word "love" is the same, but in its original Greek, Jesus uses a different word for love than Peter does the first two times. Some of the translations are different than others, so there's some room to try and interpret what is actually meant. You also have to realize that this was written thousands of years before Astronomy, so its possible that God made it understandable to the people of the time who would read it instead of baffling them with the way things really were.
The Bible makes many references to the "Floodgates of Heaven." It's probably a figurative thing.
It would be far more baffling to give them something more truthful, would it not? If God had claimed to have invented gravity, he may have gotten somewhere.
-
uh, yes, that's what I said. And what do you mean about gravity?
-
similar, but the moving factor is different. Some entertain the thought that God made evolution and set it into motion after he created species, fully knowing what would come of it.
The moving factor may be different, but the similarities are way to similar to just brush off.
EDIT: Used the wrong word in the second part.
-
are they? With the theists they claim that God started it all, that a conscious being made the beginning. Those who believe in the creation theory of evolution claim it just sort of happened because of a chemical thing that just happened to jive. That's pretty different to me.
-
uh, yes, that's what I said. And what do you mean about gravity?
Exactly, so if God had told us how things ACTUALLY worked, or even hinted at it, then it would've been much better proof to his own existence. If he was all-knowing, he would have known just that.
-
are they? With the theists they claim that God started it all, that a conscious being made the beginning. Those who believe in the creation theory of evolution claim it just sort of happened because of a chemical thing that just happened to jive. That's pretty different to me.
Read my post again, I messed up last time.
-
Shy: God does know how all that stuff works. He invented it; he ought to know. The thing is, he had more important things to explain to us in the Bible, such as his lovingkindness, mercy, grace, holiness, and his plan for our salvation. Why would he waste time explaining to us everything in the world he created? To me, part of the perk of living in this world is that we DON'T know everything. Every time some scientist discovers some new thing, I think, "Wow, what an awesome concept from an awesome God."
Leo: I'm having trouble seeing what you mean. Sorry. An almighty creator and a spontaneous reaction seem way too different for me.
-
Shy: God does know how all that stuff works. He invented it; he ought to know. The thing is, he had more important things to explain to us in the Bible, such as his lovingkindness, mercy, grace, holiness, and his plan for our salvation. Why would he waste time explaining to us everything in the world he created? To me, part of the perk of living in this world is that we DON'T know everything. Every time some scientist discovers some new thing, I think, "Wow, what an awesome concept from an awesome God."
Leo: I'm having trouble seeing what you mean. Sorry. An almighty creator and a spontaneous reaction seem way too different for me.
But it's not God that came up with the idea, why attribute it to him?
You realize that's a Greek polytheistic way of thinking?
Also, if God was all-knowing, then he would know the perfect solution to getting people to follow him. If he wanted people to follow him, he should have given us actual proof of his ideas and things before-hand.
He isn't omniscient. Also, this goes way back to the Soddom and Gomorra thing me and wtp were talking about: If God gave use the choice whether or not to believe in him, why destroy the cities? Even if they were actively plotting to destroy God's cities, then why doesn't he do anything about it nowadays? Why didn't he stop those terrorists from destroying the Twin Towers when there was an arseload of Christians inside of them? He's willing to destroy entire cities to save his people, but not some terrorists?
Who gave God the right to say what is right and wrong, to seek out Justice in our world when he doesn't have to live in it, when he's above the law? He sets a great example in that way, doesn't he?
-
Shy, I said that God did come up with all of those ideas. How else would they get here? Random chance?
God's ways are not our ways; it's said very specifically in the Bible. We cannot begin to fathom why he allowed the terrorist attacks. All I know is this: all of those in that building had fulfilled their purpose when they died. That is why people die: because they have fulfilled God's purpose for them. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I DO NOT want a God I can understand. Because if I can understand him, that puts him on the level of my intellect, and, great as it is, I would not want me being the most powerful being in the world.
Uh, no one gave God the right to say what is right and wrong. Because he was. That's simply it. He was, and no one else was. God cannot live in our world because of sin. God has come up with a perfect plan to save us, and he came up with an amazing plan to get our attention. It's all in Revelation. And still, people don't follow God because they want the pleasure of sins. He did give us proof of his deeds beforehand. He gave us prophecies, said, "Here's where I'll be when, so watch." And then, lo and behold, he did it. It's called Messiah, Jesus Christ. Books that were written between 500 to about 1000 years before him were fulfilled.
Also, about Sodom and Gomorrah, those cities were destroyed because they were wallowing in sin. There was not a good man in either of them. God told Lot, "If you can find but one good man in the city, I will spare them." But Lot could not.
You seem to be under the impression that if you're a Christian, good fortune will follow you everywhere you go. That is terribly wrong. Christians are to expect persecution, hardship, and all manners of bad things.
-
well if this is going to go on much longer I will not be happy. This isn't the sort of thing that you should be typeing about unless you want to start a huge debate and I for one can not tolerate people who say this type of stuff I I I
I MUST NOT..... MUST RESIST...... I MUST KILL TOPIC STARTER!!!!!
-
don't kill Shyox... without him, we have no alliance!
-
I believe the statistics for the big bang happening was 1 out of 100... with 40000 zeroes after it
-
Wow..
I was led to beleive that this alliance was somewhat forward thinking.
This is the second alliance where I have encountered hardcore bookthumpers.. In the team which is reknowned for being the most open minded. I'm beginning to think CN is a covert front for christian evangelists.
Whats the deal?
-
We accept all kinds in the RIA.
Someone posted a topic, and they replied, not a big deal.
Outside of this and maybe a couple other topics spread across Random Insanity and General Discussion, the issue never comes up.
Invincable13matt and Wethepeople have both been rather respectful, noones told me (the avowed atheist) that I'm going to hell, or that I'm blind to the truth or anything like that.
-
Anything where a non-christian gathers is sa place for evangilism
-
Anything where a non-christian gathers is sa place for evangilism
Or maybe a college? A scientific laboratory? A symposium of intellectuals?
I would *love* to see you evangelize in such a setting.
-
you can evangilize anywhere i do at school
as long as you got the guts to say something you can evagalize
-
will someone please close this topic I really want to kill the person who started it in the first place
*I am a christian and my father is a pastor so yea I take great offense to all of this
-
will someone please close this topic I really want to kill the person who started it in the first place
*I am a christian and my father is a pastor so yea I take great offense to all of this
lol first, this was started by an admin. second, you can express your opinion on the matter without demanding that it be closed. and isnt one of your commandments "thou shalt not kill"?
oh and just for the record im an atheist. the idea of some guy in the sky (or even a unifying spirit) having anything to do with our lives just seems preposterous to me. and the fear tactic of saying ill go to hell if i refuse to appease this guiding force thing by following some random archaic code of laws is just crazy. seriously, youd think an all-knowing creator would have something better to do than go around damning his creations if they fantasize about sex...
-
dude everyone sins
but if you except jesus then you could sin all you want and still go to heaven but you should not
and when was the last time someone got damned?
-
dude everyone sins
but if you except jesus then you could sin all you want and still go to heaven but you should not
i didnt mention sin. i said appeasement. accepting the idea that there is a god (or that it had a son) somehow pleases it. i mean, why the hell would it care?
if everyone were to stop believing in gods the entire concept would disappear. i mean, look at the greek gods. you do realize that these gods were not "mythology" to the ancient greeks - they were religion. now that everyone has stopped believing in them, they no longer exist as gods, but instead as stories. you can say the same about the roman gods, norse gods, celtic gods, aztec gods, mayan gods... etc.
i find it amusing (in a depressing way) that missionaries from major religions go around spreading their crap to indigenous people. i wonder what the world would be like if the yanomamo or the azmat spread their religions around the world. after all, they have just as much credibility!
and when was the last time someone got damned?
do you even know what getting damned means? it would be when god (or one of his minions) banishes you to hell (or an equivalent) for some period of time (although christians say eternity... ouch) because of your actions on earth. the religions that use this scare tactic conveniently claims that it happens after death, so that it cant be disproven unless you can communicate with the dead.
-
God cares about us because he created us
you get banished to hell forever or for never
-
People who accept as fact something which has no rational basis are crazy. The clinical definition of insanity is repetition of behavior while expecting different results. This means that if you pray without result more than once, you are clinically insane. While not clinically insane, the atheist is nonetheless (to my mind) equally insane to the 'person of faith.' Seriously, who the hell are you people to say - for sure, that there is or is not a god?
Spirituality is one tool (of many) for the ignorant to explain unexplained phenomena. While this in and of itself does not denote insanity, there are many other tools available to modern mankind with which to explain the universe around us. Science for instance, is an extremely valuable tool because for the most part it can be verified through testing by whoever has the resources and the know-how. Old books are a tool which allow modern people to study what people in the past thought. Using old books as empirical evidence is pseudo-science. To be sure, I am speaking mainly of the christian bible, the quran, the gospels, the tora, and other jewish texts. I am not saying there is *no* truth in these texts, which is shown by various treasure hunters who have in fact unearthed artifacts from places to which they were directed by ancient writings. However, to use these texts as some kind of evidence of the existance of one or more gods is totally ludicrous.
Why don't you people stop and think?
The only way to have a concept of god is to let go of your need for sureness. I do not believe in god, nor do I believe in the non-existance of god. If you educate yourselves (via lectures from intellectuals or books other than propaganda), you will come to find that the various old texts claiming a gensis myth contain exactly that: a myth. The doppler effect shows us the approximate age of the universe. The fossil record shows us the timeline of life on this planet. Many people think "dinosaurs" when the word fossil is evoked, but as a biotechnology major, I am educated on the evolution of bacteria millions of years before any 'higher' forms of life existed. There is evidence written in stone which is much older and much more empirical than any dusty book you religious types can produce.
I feel that I have not yet fully expressed my point. I definitely do not want to leave atheists out of my tirade, for they are equally closed-minded and full of their own egos. For you people who claim the non-existance of god as fact (all atheists), please explain what caused the initial spark. Case closed. I do want to say however, that at least athiests for the most part do not try and spread their drivel to the ears of others. At least atheists do not belong to an organization responsible for *THE WORST* atrocities against mankind.
I really hate to have to break this shit down to you uneducated victims of cultural brainwashing, but as I have chosen this alliance as my home, I feel it is my responsibility. To those who claim that the leaders of the crusades etc. were not christian, I must say that you're full of hoolabaloo. It's as if you were neo-nazis, who still believe in the aryan race, but do not support hitler-esque ethnic cleansing, and say that hitler wasn't a real nazi. The people who led the crusades, the spanish inquisition, the witch-hunts.. THEY WERE IN FACT CHRISTIAN, WHO FOLLOWED ALL OF THE SAME STRUCTURES OF RULES THAT YOU DO NOW. You belong to a cult which has history of extreme racial violence. When talking to an educated person, you cannot divorce yourself from these facts. This is why christians are not taken seriously by the educated.
All of that being said, I believe that there may in fact have been a jesus, a mohammed, a siddhartha, etc. They were most likely well-spoken individuals with very strong feelings. They were able to convey messages, which others wrote down because the messages were good. It is plain as day that many of the things these MEN said were good. However, as soon as those with power and influence started meddling with the messages (religion, any), instantly the messages were corrupted.
Religion is a tool of the powerful to keep the masses tired and thusly ignorant and non-violent.
Think about it. If john doe thinks there is a heaven awaiting him if he leads a good life, he will work harder - waking up earlier and working longer into the twilight. He will 'put in his dues,' so that he will be accepted into an eternity of happiness. This tactic is little more advanced than the carrot on a stick which makes the donkey walk further than he otherwise could/would. As soon as word of the effectiveness of this tactic spread, religion was invited into nearly every major empire in the world. Look it up, you can see the spread of religion is faster than any other movement. It was changed and refined, with the more successful empires clinging to a certain doctrine as if it was part of the original culture. History (even your bible, if looked at from a different point of view) shows us these facts with unarguable certainty. The kings of the land embraced religion wholeheartedly, not because of any belief in the dogmas, but because the results in production and refinement of resources and the lower levels of crime were immediate and astonishing. People developed stronger communities and had better lives. On the surface this seems like a great thing for everyone, but it is based on falsehoods and lies, and the machinations of the powerful. These people, now tired from working more and happy because such work would lead them to the afterlife, stopped putting so much emphasis on what was happening around them. They simply did not have time to care about the infidels. The higher tax influx allowed the leaders of the day more resources with which to pay for armies to wage war in foreign lands. This increase in funds was of course spun to reflect some god's acceptance and encouragement, and so many otherwise non-judgemental young men went to war to kill many people who's skin was a different color.
All in the name of god.
I could go on and on.
-
*edit Double posted..*
-
it says in the bible which was written over 2000 years and which is historically accurate
and which is more likely- the big bang or a all-powerful deity existing and creating ewvrything
-
it says in the bible which was written over 2000 years and which is historically accurate
and which is more likely- the big bang or a all-powerful deity existing and creating ewvrything
That is the lamest run-on and incomplete sentance I have ever seen.
I speak english as my first language. Does RIA have a translator for "moron-to-english" in the house? Someone please explain his point, or lack thereof.
-
I dislike the fact that you seem to believe that all Christians are not educated. That hurts my feelings and makes me a ::, because I am amongst the smartest in my class. Please don't make such a mistake again. I have considered all of this. I'm not a fool. I have seen the full case for Christ. The ancient prophecies fulfilled, and his resurrection. Because all of this is true, therefore everything he said is true. And the people who wrote his books weren't exactly deluded fools- take, for example, Matthew, who was a tax collector. He would be an intelligent person. He must have generally believed that Jesus was Christ and also God if he was to write the Gospel named after him.
Also, do not so quickly believe that science and Christianity cannot co-exist. Some parts do clash, but some parts of science go quite along with the things Christianity says. It would seem you think that as well.
And please don't call me an "uneducated [victim] of cultural brainwashing" because I am not. I have simply made a decision. You have made yours. Please do not be so disrespectful about it. I am not disrespecting your view in any way.
-
I'm not a fool. I have seen the full case for Christ. The ancient prophecies fulfilled, and his resurrection. Because all of this is true, therefore everything he said is true.
unsupported
adjective
1. not sustained or maintained by nonmaterial aid; "unsupported accusations" [ant: supported]
2. not held up or borne; "removal of the central post left the roof unsupported" [ant: supported]
rhetoric /ˈrɛtərɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ret-er-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
noun 1. (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.
2. the art or science of all specialized literary uses of language in prose or verse, including the figures of speech.
3. the study of the effective use of language.
4. the ability to use language effectively.
5. the art of prose in general as opposed to verse.
6. the art of making persuasive speeches; oratory.
7. (in classical oratory) the art of influencing the thought and conduct of an audience.
8. (in older use) a work on rhetoric.
-
you're not getting anywhere by being disrespectful
-
I'm not being disrespectful matt; I'm stating truth. If you feel disrespected by the truth, perhaps some introspection on your part is in order.
-
Anyway, why don't you try *not* using logical fallacies (in this case, you employ the ad hominem or "against the arguer" fallacy, in which the debate opponent ignores the argument of his or her counterpart and instead makes a personal attack on the credibility of said counterpart) to support your cause and develop a point?
-
let's see here... heavily conotated words and sentences to the negative seems pretty disrespectful to me... i.e. "Does RIA have a translator for "moron-to-english" in the house?" "Why don't you people stop and think?" "uneducated victims of cultural brainwashing" This is very heavily weighted diction, and I would ask you to think twice before using such again.
And deciding that someone is so beneath you that you have to state definitions instead of simply stating what you think is out of order. You could have simply said, "I believe that what you think is unsupported" instead of talking down to me. That's disrespect.
Also, you yourself called your method of discourse a "tirade" which is an angry, vehement sort of speech. This isn't warranted here. None of us are being angry or hostile toward you; you should not do that to us.
-
Matt, I don't believe your rhetoric is unsupported, I know it for a fact. People who believe without question in the existance of a god (especially a specific god) are in fact brainwashed by their respective cultures, uneducated as to the facts of this world, and I feel they have been unduely victimized by the powers that be.
As far as me calling that guy a moron, look at his pattern of speech, and the substance of his words: you will find a definite lack of education and motivation to change his current state of ignorance. This is the same guy who said "spelling only matters in a lit paper?"
..and what's wrong with asking people to think?
-
*sighs*
brainwashed
adjective
subjected to intensive forced indoctrination resulting in the rejection of old beliefs and acceptance of new ones; "brainwashed prisoners of war"; "captive audiences for TV commercials can become brainwashed consumers"
hence, I am not brainwashed because I believe it on my own, not for another. I have considered it, and all the factors, as a scholar, and have made my choice. I question it all the time. But I come back to it after some consideration.
How do I know he's not a moron? Uh, as I am writing this, he is sitting within three feet of me...
And there's nothing wrong with asking people to think, just the tone in which you said it.
-
hence, I am not brainwashed because I believe it on my own, not for another.
Uh huh..and how did you come to jesus? I suppose you caused the bible to be written and the priests to be put in their place? I suppose you thought up god and caused him to exist?
It came from somewhere, matt, and most likely your parents or another set of people who you consider peers or your betters. You didn't think up the christian religion all on your own, so for you to say that you believe it on your own is completely ludicrous. Furthermore, I feel that your continued use of illogical rhetoric invalidates any opinion you may hold concerning the moron who thinks that Coke and leaves are not addictive and are used for medicinal purposes the majority of the time.
Try thinking about the growth and distribution of Coke and leaves to various undeveloped peoples in south america. The people in power make them widely available, and the toniculace is tonic-high all day and into the night.. ..these people work 14-16 hour days in forced-labor conditions. Add to this that the leaves are addictive to these people so they lose all ability or need to stop, and you have the makings of a massive pseudo-slavery labor machine. Think it's not addictive? The definition for addiction is continued use of a substance or other focus, when such use causes drastic negative consequences. Chronic chewing of Coke and leaves leads directly to the falling-out of these people teeth: is this not a drastic negative consequence?
moron /ˈm”rɒn, ˈmoʊr-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mawr-on, mohr-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
noun 1. a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
2. Psychology. a person of borderline intelligence in a former classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69.
I don't know what your good-buddies IQ is, but I'm sure that his good judgement is notably lacking when he purports Coke and leaves as being safe and medicinal.
-
whoops, wrong moron. Sorry about that. And your cocoa leaves thing is off-topic.
And you are misusing brainwashed. No one just comes to Christ of their own free will, the bible is clear of that. If left to our own devices, we will wallow in sin, enjoy it. There has to be someone to pull us out of it. However, you believe, somehow, that I was forced into it. This is untrue. It was my decision, and mine alone. I can choose to live a lie, undetected by anyone, for as long as I wish. But I did not choose that. I chose Christ.
Also, why do you keep calling my rhetoric invalid? I have made no lapse in logic as of yet.
-
and I love how you feel it is necessary to constantly be vehement about this. There's no need to be so mad about it. This topic was created for friendly discussion, not for figuratively shouting at each other.
-
And you are misusing brainwashed.
Actually I said cultural brainwashing, let me restate:
The systematic indoctrination and change of attitudes and beliefs based on repitition of myths and the inherant confusion caused by stating such myths as facts promoted by a particular social, or ethnic group to be transmitted from one generation to another.
culture /ˈkʌltʃər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kuhl-cher] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -tured, -turing.
noun 1. the quality in a person or society that arises from a concern for what is regarded as excellent in arts, letters, manners, scholarly pursuits, etc.
3. a particular form or stage of civilization, as that of a certain nation or period: Greek culture.
5. the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group: the youth culture; the drug culture.
6. Anthropology. the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another.
*unrelated definitions deleted
brainwashing /ˈbreɪnˌwɒʃɪŋ, -ˌwɔʃɪŋ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[breyn-wosh-ing, -waw-shing] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
noun 1. a method for systematically changing attitudes or altering beliefs, originated in totalitarian countries, esp. through the use of torture, drugs, or psychological-stress techniques.
2. any method of controlled systematic indoctrination, esp. one based on repetition or confusion: brainwashing by TV commercials.
3. an instance of subjecting or being subjected to such techniques: efforts to halt the brainwashing of captive audiences.
So, how am I misusing that phrase?
No one just comes to Christ of their own free will, the bible is clear of that. If left to our own devices, we will wallow in sin, enjoy it.
This is exactly the type of rhetoric I am speaking about. Why is the state of being open minded considered sin?
However, you believe, somehow, that I was forced into it. This is untrue. It was my decision, and mine alone. I can choose to live a lie, undetected by anyone, for as long as I wish. But I did not choose that. I chose Christ.
To quote blindly someone who probably did not understand the true meaning of his words: "the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he does not exist." You do not recognize the forced nature of your 'chosen' beliefs. You have been systematically indoctrinated into a way of thinking that is centuries old and based on myths and falsehoods.
Also, why do you keep calling my rhetoric invalid? I have made no lapse in logic as of yet.
I don't think you understand what rhetoric is. I hate to repeat myself, but since it's just a copy/paste:
rhetoric /ˈrɛtərɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ret-er-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
noun 1. (in writing or speech) the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast.
2. the art or science of all specialized literary uses of language in prose or verse, including the figures of speech.
3. the study of the effective use of language.
4. the ability to use language effectively.
5. the art of prose in general as opposed to verse.
6. the art of making persuasive speeches; oratory.
7. (in classical oratory) the art of influencing the thought and conduct of an audience.
8. (in older use) a work on rhetoric.
Rhetoric is the 'artful use of words,' or the 'art of influencing the thought and conduct of others.' This is another way of saying 'using words instead of evidence,' which is another way of saying 'cultural brainwashing.' See? It's all connected, I have delt with your kind before and you are not nearly as strong in your belief or as wise in your use of words as some of my past opponents. I know you must feel backed into a corner and confused by my unflinching use of reason, and I must stress that this is because you cannot use any of your arguments in a reasonable way. Everything you say is backed up by ancient texts, which are themselves backed up by nothing. Everything I say is backed up by repeated experiment and refinement of thoughts amongst intellectuals. It is no wonder that your stuttering and incoherant replies cannot touch my brilliant arguments.
Find the best amongst you: the most educated, the most faithful. I will debate your champion into the ground. You are but a speedbump.
-
and I love how you feel it is necessary to constantly be vehement about this. There's no need to be so mad about it. This topic was created for friendly discussion, not for figuratively shouting at each other.
It may in fact have been started for that reason, but it has turned into you ('you' henceforth to be defined as 'the religious mob of RIA') overriding the (loose and incoherant) arguments of those who disagree with you. I have seen this before, and I cannot stand the religious mob trying to outargue people (unable to succesfully counter your mob tactics) who try and reasonably state opposing opinions. I am representing the opposition to religion, and I represent it with serious amounts of time spent educating myself, not only in scientific disciplines but also in religious. Your fallacies will not defeat me, for I have studied hard the ways of my enemy.
As far as why I am so vehement, I have already stated my dislike of seeing reasonable (if ignorant) people being trodden on by the masses of the faithful, but also because I enjoy defeating you with logic and right-mindedness. I enjoy shoving the fermented drivel which represents your religion into the faces of those who try and spread their sickness. I am using your own tactics against you, and you don't like it. How do I know the tactics you use? They were tried on me. I am still cleaning my mind of the last vestiges of religious training recieved when my mind was too young and malleable to defend itself. Now that I'm better, I have taken seriously the fact that this is war. Your minds are already lost, but it is not too late to read a book.
-
I would comment, but as this has turned into a battle of dictionaries, I would like to declare the following instead:
I don't hold any one individual responsible, but this topic is now full of Phail. As such I declare this topic will no longer be about the topic,instead it will be about Funktuar
(http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m165/Andy_Damen/1177705044426s.jpg)
I believe Funktaur is the wrong direction for the RIA. Funktuar makes us look like an alliance that wishes to relive the '70s and bring back disco. Personally I do not wish the RIA to be associated with disco, and so say down with Funktuar, up with Cactuar
-
But funktuar would bring groovy tunes!
..and I only quote the dictionary because these people are misusing words. I vote for the great reading-comprehensiontuar to take his place as vice-admiral to funktuar.
-
i have better things to do than get caught in an argument which nobody will win. i just wanted to tell callofduty to bugger off b/c this is a public forum and you cant just impose your will on it (unless you are a mod i guess). and then i had to tell pielord that i would rather not be preached to when im just trying to play an online game.
everything that i would say can be found elsewhere online anyway, as i am not the only person in the world who has come up with good reasons to be an athiest, and there are countless websites with good reasons to be a christian too. in the unlikely event that i feel the need to convert, i will seek the information on my own, thanks.
have fun arguing your points!
-
I have already won.
I have shown the futility of believing without question in the existance or non-existance of god.
You said that nobody can win the argument, and I believe you refer to the existance or non-existance of god.
I say that I have won because I take a third position, the only valid position based on the total lack of any evidence, which is to simply state that "I don't know." This is the only sane argument; this is the only possible argument; this is the only honest argument.
I want to specify that while I think people who unquestioningly believe in god are nutso, they are but the umbrella group of a specific group which I was 'vehemently' arguing against. This group is 'religious' people, who believe that their way of unquestiongly believing in god is somehow superior to the ways that others unquestiongly believe in god. All of these people get lumped (by me, in my wisdom) into the religious group and are not only crazy but stupid.
I have already won, because I can take the simple step and admit that I know nothing.
-
You sicken my heart. And that takes a lot, considering I am rather heartless. You speak of open-mindedness, and yet because I am trying to argue for a certain viewpoint you classify my arguments as the same as those you have encountered before.
I am trying to be reasonable, not trying to stampede over my opposition. I am attempting, as you are, to convince others of my viewpoint. However, the difference is the method. You seem to believe that by being vehement and bitter, that your argument is effective. You are decidedly closed-minded against what you consider religion. I am not part of a religion. I have had to state this many times. What I am talking about is a relationship with God, who I fully believe in. I base my belief off the teachings of Jesus Christ, who I believe to have risen from the dead based on the account of scripture.
You believe that you are in the right mind. I believe that I am in the right mind. THAT is why we differ. And do not say that you do not believe, you know, because that is literally impossible. You cannot know until you meet your maker, or lack thereof. I do not mind your tactics. I mind your complete lack of disrespect and your apparent vindication by the belief that you are decimating your opposition.
I never said that being open-minded was a sin. I said that what humans do when left to their own devices is sin.
And, again, I am not brainwashed. Brainwashing, regardless of whether it is by culture or not, is the deliberate forcing of a belief onto a person. I reiterate, I was not forced. I chose it. I was not brainwashed as you think. I, not my parents, not my culture, not my friends, not my peers, chose it. So stop trying to convince me I was brainwashed. I can think clearly, contrary to what you may think. I have taken a look into all other things, and come to my own conclusion.
And you miss def. 5 of rhetoric. I think I'm talking in prose.
Oh, and you might want to deflate your ego. I don't feel any sort of panic or backing into a corner. In fact, I am feeling quite refreshed. I was almost disappointed that this topic (amongst others) seemed dead.
And my "ancient texts" are backed up by eyewitness accounts and other such things. Things that even you acknowledged, i.e. the treasures you spoke of earlier. Many historians agree on the validity of the non-divine aspects of scripture; events such as the crucifixion, birth of certain people, things like that. Stuff that no one would bother disagreeing with because it has no effect on a "religion." Most of these scholars agree that Jesus was crucified. Hence, that part of my argument has some validity. After his crucifixion, a rich man named Joseph asked for the body, unusual for a victim of crucifixion. Pilate, possibly because, as the Bible states, he did not like the whole affair in general, granted Joseph's request. And so Jesus was buried.
This is where we get into the parts that historians tend to disagree about- the divine stuff. The resurrection of Jesus is widely debated. But I believe that he was resurrected, because no one has come up with an effective argument against it. This is why I believe how I do. So don't say I'm brainwashed. I've been through this many times. It holds water.
And cc, I completely agree.
-
did I ever say I knew anything? That is why this is called faith, my friend.
-
I am attempting, as you are, to convince others of my viewpoint.
I will come back to (an edited version of) this statement, but for now I will respond to it directly in it's entirety:
I am not trying to convince anyone of anything, I am simply stating facts in a public forum and defeating false arguments that others have given.
On to the meat of what I have to say. You sir, are a hyppocrite! Out of one side of your mouth you say:
I am not part of a religion.
And this doctrine (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/doctrine) simultaneously spews from the other side:
What I am talking about is a relationship with God
Capitalization of the word god is a christian doctrine.
I base my belief off the teachings of Jesus Christ
The "teachings of jesus christ" are part of the christian doctrine.
based on the account of scripture.
Basing beliefs on religious scripture is evidence of the pervasiveness of christian doctrine in your life.
Most of these scholars agree that Jesus was crucified. Hence, that part of my argument has some validity.
What scholars? Show me a peer reviewed scientific journal which purports to have factual evidence of jesus christ. It is christian doctrine to purport that 'experts' agree on evidence of the validity of religion.
This is where we get into the parts that historians tend to disagree about- the divine stuff.
Again, to which historians do you refer? I state that there are in fact none, so prove it. It is christian doctrine to purport that 'experts' agree on evidence of the validity of religion.
But I believe that he was resurrected
More christian doctrine.
This is why I believe how I do
Belief without proof is called faith, which is part of christian and other religions' doctrine.
It holds water.
I guess you gotta end with a bang right? When all else fails just try and say you're right and I'm wrong. LoL
This is just from one post; I could go back and gather a 'best of' collection of the stupid, indoctrinated filth that you spew, but I just don't care enough. You didn't come up with any of those things that I quoted on your own. Not a single original thought. You look pretty brainwashed to me. The rest of your post is just more rhetoric.. *yawn*
Also, this is funny:
I mind your complete lack of disrespect
-
did I ever say I knew anything? That is why this is called faith, my friend.
See my last post for information on faith. Also, I am not your friend.
-
nothing is absolute and i only misspell words so it is faster to type
when you im someone do you sit and spell everything perfectly with great grammar!?
and you did not answer my question: which is more likely- the big bang or an allpowerful deity creatng evrything?
-
True Christianity, by my standards, is a relationship with Jesus. I believe in Christian doctrine, that is correct. Did I ever say I was trying split with that? It's just my view that it is not religion is why I am different. The word religion stems from literally means, "to bind back," hence, religion is man's attempt to bind himself to God. Christianity is different in that it is God trying to get man to come to him.
Also, I was actually Wiki-ing it as I was typing it, that's where my sources come from... look up "Historical Jesus."
Oh, yes. To me, for no apparent reason, when something hasn't happened in billions of tries, somehow that indicates to me that it should be happening sometime soon. Don't ask why. It's my weird mannerism.
I move to end this argument, on account that it is getting nowhere. This happens in debate. You and are both convinced absolutely that we are in the right, and we each have extremely strong convictions. This debate will not go either way, neither of us is getting anyway, in other words, it is utterly pointless. I will no more believe that I am wrong than you undoubtedly do. And, as you probably know with your undoubtably large intellect, doing something pointless is stupid. Actually, I think this proves we're both insane... we keep doing the same thing over and over as if expecting different results.
-
nothing is absolute and i only misspell words so it is faster to type
Whatever gets you through the night, dude.
when you im someone do you sit and spell everything perfectly with great grammar!?
Yes. No, not really, but at least I try. Also, this is not an IM, it is a semi-serious debate on the nature of the universe..
and you did not answer my question: which is more likely- the big bang or an allpowerful deity creatng evrything?
I could not understand that you were asking a question, or what such a question may have been, due to your complete lack of regard for the structure of the english language.
But to answer your question, I don't think they are mutually exclusive. If you actually read my post, instead of judging me by what you imagined someone like me would say, you would understand that I do not deny the possiblility of the existance of god. We *do* know for sure that all of the stars in the known universe are moving away from a single point, at a relative constant acceleration, so there is a lot of evidence as to the veracity of the big bang theory. However, what caused the big bang is a question nobody can yet answer. If and when we do answer that question, we must think about what caused the thing that caused the big bang.. ..and what caused that? ..and what caused that?
It's a chicken vs. the egg problem, and the ultimate answer will not be reached until, to paraphrase matt: you meet or do not meet your maker. I accept the possibility of either situation, but I strongly and vehamently deny the gospel as preached by InsertYourReligionHere.
-
True Christianity, by my standards, is a relationship with Jesus. I believe in Christian doctrine, that is correct. Did I ever say I was trying split with that?
Yes, in fact you did.. You said (and I quote) "I am not part of a religion."
It's just my view that it is not religion is why I am different. The word religion stems from literally means, "to bind back," hence, religion is man's attempt to bind himself to God. Christianity is different in that it is God trying to get man to come to him.
I don't care what etymological roots the word religion has. Many modern words meant many things in the past which they do not mean now. You're not going to convince me that christianity is not a religion (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion). Your poor attempt at semantical skulduggery fails.
Also, I was actually Wiki-ing it as I was typing it, that's where my sources come from... look up "Historical Jesus."
Wikipedia, while an invaluable resource for lower level school reports and personal acculturation, is not a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
Oh, yes. To me, for no apparent reason, when something hasn't happened in billions of tries, somehow that indicates to me that it should be happening sometime soon. Don't ask why. It's my weird mannerism.
I don't need to ask why. Having studied psychology, I know that your condition is called "clinical insanity."
I move to end this argument, on account that it is getting nowhere.
Of course you do, you're wrong and so now are desperately trying to grasp at some way to end this in which you save face. Too bad I see through your obvious ruse, eh?
This happens in debate. You and are both convinced absolutely that we are in the right, and we each have extremely strong convictions. This debate will not go either way, neither of us is getting anyway, in other words, it is utterly pointless. I will no more believe that I am wrong than you undoubtedly do. And, as you probably know with your undoubtably large intellect, doing something pointless is stupid. Actually, I think this proves we're both insane... we keep doing the same thing over and over as if expecting different results.
You say that this debate will not go either way, and that is correct, because it has already gone my way. I have strong, peer-reviewed, scientific evidence, you have "something someone wrote." Sounds to me like you're trying to 'weasel' your way out of this argument by appealing to the moderators to end end a discussion rather than let me speak. This is exactly the tactic hitler and countless other book-burning tyrants have employed to silence words which do not promote their aims. The results which I expect from this exchange is not to convince you of anything. I couldn't care less what someone like you thinks. My aims are to shoot down the lies that you and people like you purvey to the poor minds of this board, and expose those lies for what they are. Therefore it is only you who persist in banging your head against the wall: bringing to the table again and again falsehoods and lies, while I continue to eruditely defeat your feebly constructed 'thoughts,' if you can even call them thoughts.. ..more like groupthink. To be succesful in this endeavor to champion the unheard party in this debate, I must continue with fervor that matches and in fact exceeds yours, which I have apparently done, since after only one half a day you are ready to throw in the towel.
You have thrown your best arguments at me, and I have obviously addressed each of them in turn. You are evidently not the man for the job.
Like I said, get the best debator amongst you to champion your christ doctrine, your allah doctrine. I will simply continue to poke holes and point out pre-existing holes in doctrinal 'logic.'
-
This is exactly the tactic hitler and countless other book-burning tyrants have employed to silence words which do not promote their aims.
It didn't work for them either, don't feel bad.
-
This topic has become like a trainwreck, horrible, yet I can't make myself look away.
(breathe)
OK, I tried to be subtle, but this is beyond even the powers of Funktaur to stop.
First things first...
Perc, you will not compare a fellow RIA member, or anyone on these forums to Hitler. Hitler and the Nazis worked hard being as evil as they were, and I will not have you disgracing their determination and hard work in the persuit of evil.
That being said, it is time for all to understand that it is completely possible for two people to draw differing, even contradictory conclusions from the same evidence. We humans are limited, we do not understand everything. We can not look past the Planck time to the beginning.
We've reached a point in this discussion, where productive discussion has stopped. Anything further is pointless.
Ultimately I'm powerless to stop you, but I will say this. It takes two to have a fight, if one of you doesn't show up, this ends. So, I plead with you just walk away. Don't even post that you agree with this post, just let this topic die the death it deserves.
And if one of you sticks around, and proclaims they have won because the other "ran away", just know it will tell me far more about your maturity (or lack thereof) than it does the correctness of your arguement.
If anyone wishes to respond, use a PM. This topic is dead to me now.
-
I have to reply, just on general principal, since you told me not to.
That's all
-
your refusal to have a belief in any religion/relationship shows your stupidity fully
stupidity is knowing something and doing something stupid anyway
ignorance is not bothering to know anything
I do not deny the possiblility of the existance of god
you do not deny the existence of god yet you do not confirm it
you are stupid and ignorant
-
pie, your a fool. Name-calling is not effective, nor is it logical. (actually it's a complete fallacy called ad hominum.)
Perc. Can we let this die and not go at each other like this? I don't like being in a place I don't feel wanted (which is a lot of places) and a couple people being irritated kinda throws things off. I'm not a particularly strong debater, I have holes in my head from AP exams taking shots at me and a messed up head from landing on it lately.
I never tried to convince you of anything. I just said what I think, and likely will continue to thing, due to my overloyal nature.
On a funnier note... I'm clinically insane!!! I knew it all along!!!
Seriously though, no hard feelings.
-
i already knew i was a fool matt thank you for the (very) old info
-
"It is better to be thought a fool and say nothing than to say something and remove all doubt."
-
"It is better to be thought a fool and say nothing than to say something and remove all doubt."
That's one of my favorites. heh
Here's another:
"Pray, v.: To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy."
-Ambrose Bierce
---
Matt:
Don't trip, you were doughty enough to take me on for longer than most! I don't dislike you or anything, hell I don't even know you.. The same might not be able to be said for the things you believe in, but hey, thats just one aspect of who you are. I feel bad that you take this so seriously, and that others want to shut me down rather than have a stronger debate. I'm seriously beginning to think that CN is a covert christian front for converting gamers; any other game and I would have an army of unintelligent atheist trolls backing me up, instead I find (again) that these people just want to shut me up. Oh well, sorry again that I made you feel bad, I thought you were enjoying it like me. I wouldn't want you to cry or anything.
Pielord:
Because your writing makes very little to no sense, I guess that you are (feebly) attempting to insult me ('as if' lol); I'll consider it a compliment.
*EDIT*
P.S. I thought I would fit in better with some scripture in my sig
-
it didn't actually make me feel bad, just gave me a headache from having to think too much... and despite having (forgive me for my lack of modesty) a reasonably larger than average intellect, I hate to think a lot. I take everything seriously... people say I need to stop doing that. and CN really isn't a converting thing... I don't think so, at least. There's just a couple of us who will defend this to the death, and others who just don't like it when someone uses lots of really high-sounding language in a forum... I mean, look at pie, who can barely be bothered to string together a coherent sentence!
-
i was insulting you?
oh right of course my plan all along
-
There's just a couple of us who will defend this to the death
*looks around*
*listens to crickets*
Who?
and others who just don't like it when someone uses lots of really high-sounding language in a forum
As is stoned sounding or high and mighty sounding? The first option is not really applicable, I have the best command of english grammar evident in this place. The latter option begs the question: "why not?" Should we not strive to better our forms of communication? Or is it doubleplus ungood to try and describe things lucidly? Comrade? Have you read 1984?
-
..and before you call me a grammar nazi (I know that I'm close to pushing it), consider the fact that I pretty much only make fun of pietard; I don't waste words about typos or mis-spellings unless they are either funny or both glaring and continued.
-
actually, I really don't mind, seeing as I have a moderately large vocabulary. I have decent control of grammar...I just prefer not to use a lot of big words so people always understand me. and I have not read 1984, but I have read about it.
-
actually, I really don't mind, seeing as I have a moderately large vocabulary. I have decent control of grammar...I just prefer not to use a lot of big words so people always understand me. and I have not read 1984, but I have read about it.
It's a must read. One of the major themes is how 'the party' (ruling government class) attempts to control thoughts by restricting language.