Im Converting!!!!!!!!

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Cris
Chosen,

I'd like to see the human race move forward and make an effort to improve it's survival. Religion seems to promote a fatalist approach, that there is little humans can do in the great scheme of things determiend by a super being. I.e. Why make an effort on Earth when one's destiny is in a life after death?

Religions detract energy away from humans improving their future. Fortunately most scientists take an atheistic approach. But I suspect a lot more could have been accomplished had religion not played such a dominant role in our past.

Cris

It depends on their perspectives. I see God as truth, and I seek this truth, may it be through science or possibly with the supernatural.

I seek the truth and will always accept it, period. If I find out God does not exist, then I will accept that truth.

Religion (Islam, etc.) are for the weak-minded people. They need religion to unite them and keep them under control (sad huh?) People are jus that ignorant.

From an athiestic point of view and towards the "weak-minded"

God is a concept to fill the void of confusion in most. If you look at the past you can see that cultures invented gods even when they were totally independent of each other. It's all a matter of need for some. Some people need to know there is something after life. Some people need to know that all the people they have known continue to exist and God is a perfect excuse to keep them sane. If there wasn't the concept of God many people wouldn't bide with society's restrictions and there would be chaos.

You may not need this concept but you have to realize other's do.

As for me, I believe in God as truth. I wouldn't say I need God, but I want God (truth). I must seek it, may it be through an after-life or through a supernatural experience. I don't come to God to answer everything, I have faith in science (faith as in I trust science ) and faith in God (trust and the belief without proof). I'm a very rare theist, Cre-evolutionist is the best term to describe me. I'm almost like a deist, but I don't believe God abandoned the universe, and I'm nondenominational.

I was once Catholic because it was forced upon me, then I became atheist for a long while, until I met a most spiritual person, that influenced me greatly and opened my mind immensely. He was "kind-hearted" and was very smart concerning science, very logical, and so on. He used God not as answers to everything but rather as a inspiration to learn and achieve more. I can't explain how he felt, it was an incredible experience that changed my life. I believe God gave us this universe to explore/learn/understand to the greatest of human potential. Therefore by my belief in a God, it does not restrict me logically at all, it does not hamper my ability to learn, and it does not hinder my growing "opening" mind.

The person that influenced me greatly embraces the Plasma Theory (which is against ex nihilo) and proposes the Universe is infinite in size and near-infinite in time

Basically I am a person seeking a truth. I put my truth, faith, and belief in God for our existence and not pure chance. If God and/or chance is our truth I will embrace it - the truth, always.

 

[(Q)]

If there wasn't the concept of God many people wouldn't bide with society's restrictions and there would be chaos.

The irrational live in constant chaos simply because they are irrational. The concept of God only justifies their irrationality. They need not use their minds for critical thinking. They choose not to understand but instead seek appeasement.

 

[Xev]

If there wasn't the concept of God many people wouldn't bide with society's restrictions and there would be chaos.

Appeal to negative consequences.

If I was not an athiest, I would not alive to type this.* Therefore, there is no God or afterlife.

You do see the problem here, do you not?

If there were no concept of God, ~21,835,595 people would not have died violent deaths. If there were no concept of God, we would be at least 100 years ahead of where we are now scientifically. If there were no concept of God, the bloody JWs would not wake me up when I have hangovers.

Thus there is no God.

Cris:

Why hate something that is irrelevant? Why be angry at something insubstantial?

Because of those ~21,835,595 human beings. Because of that hundred years. Because of Giordano Bruno. Because of Galileo. Because of Caleb Moorehead. Because of Verlyne Porter. Because of the daily attacks on my Constitution.



*Note that many would find this a good thing.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Xev


Appeal to negative consequences.

This fallacy once again doesn't apply to me. Quit using fallacies against me unless you are 100% sure it is appropiate.

If I was not an athiest, I would not alive to type this.* Therefore, there is no God or afterlife.

You do see the problem here, do you not?

Yes I do and that is irrevelant to me. I did not say God existed, did I?

If there were no concept of God, ~21,835,595 people would not have died violent deaths. If there were no concept of God, we would be at least 100 years ahead of where we are now scientifically. If there were no concept of God, the bloody JWs would not wake me up when I have hangovers.

Thus there is no God.

LoL, let me make myself clearer. I mentioned "concept" of God, and that is in the atheistic point of view.

Sad to say, many people need God to serve as a "moral absolute." A Bishop or Priest interpreting what God wants, some religious people directly misinterpret and translates what the Priests say to be what God really wants of them. Thus they use God as a moral absolute to "govern" how good they are. "OH I can't kill because it is against God's will." and so on.

But let's make another point clear, the concept of God DID unite people. But there are different unions of people and they fight each other. Therefore we don't know what path history would have taken without the "concept" of God. I understand this fallacy, but I'm in no way saying

"God must exist! If God did not exist, then all basis for morality would be lost and the world would be a horrible place!"

My point is the with "concept" of God through history (I'm not saying God exists with proof, so do not misinterpret) showed that many people wouldn't bide with society's restrictions and there would be chaos, they needed a superior being to serve as a "governor" and moral absolute.

But this doesn't mean the "concept" of God did not cause chaos. And also doesn't mean that without the "concept" of God we would not have people bide with society's restrictions and there would be chaos.

I said "many" people, not all.

 

[Xev]

This fallacy once again doesn't apply to me. Quit using fallacies against me unless you are 100% sure it is appropiate.

Hmmm, ummm, no.

A: It is perfectly appropriate.
B: I'll say whatever the fuck I please unless Dave (our webmaster) asks me not to. Or a mod. NOBODY tells Xev what to do.

Yes I do and that is irrevelant to me. I did not say God existed, did I?

You argued for the need for religion. Same difference.

But this doesn't mean the "concept" of God did not cause chaos. And also doesn't mean that without the "concept" of God we would not have people bide with society's restrictions and there would be chaos.

A: You've shown no evidence of this.
B: Your point being?

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Xev


Hmmm, ummm, no.

A: It is perfectly appropriate.
B: I'll say whatever the fuck I please unless Dave (our webmaster) asks me not to. Or a mod. NOBODY tells Xev what to do.

Go here again.

Read it a couple of times atheist.

"Perfectly appropiate"? Did I mention God must exist? Or what? Irrevelant or no? What is a concept?

You argued for the need for religion. Same difference.

I argued that some people need religion. The world doesn't need religion, but these "weak-minded" people do. Be more specific next time.

A: You've shown no evidence of this.
B: Your point being?

Why don't you take more history courses? Many civilizations used religion to control others.

Go here: Morality and Religion

Does organized religion help society? Well, organized religion does some good. For example, it can help foster a sense of community among its believers. Unfortunately, it can also create conflict between different groups of believers. Organized religion can sometimes inspire people to be kinder, to be more charitable, and to help others. But not always; consider the following: Protestants and Catholics are murdering each other in Northern Ireland. Adolf Hitler was a professed Christian whose actions were consistent with the evil Old Testament god (see Hitler's Christianity). More recently, Christians have carried out a genocidal campaign against Muslims in Kosovo. Islamic terrorists have murdered many innocent people in order to further their goals. Christian terrorists have attacked abortion clinics in the name of their god (these hypocrites call themselves pro-life; they may be pro-fetus-life, but their actions prove that they are very anti-human-life). In addition to starting wars and inspiring fanatics to commit murder, religion can damage its believers sense of personal responsibility by allowing them to shift their responsibility onto God or Satan, and this can have adverse effects on the believers' morality.

Religion does it's bad and good. The concept of God isn't required to create order and no chaos. But some people (not all) have it for order. History proves it.

"logical" one, look at the logical order of my paragraph. Other than that, I don't suggest you argue any further here.

 

[Xev]

Look Chosen, I've been kind to you because you are a little boy who cannot get laid. Return this with respect, and I would advise you not to treat your superiors with contempt.

Read it a couple of times atheist.

Was that your idea of an insult, you dickless, intellectually-deficiant little spirocyte?

"Perfectly appropiate"? Did I mention God must exist? Or what? Irrevelant or no? What is a concept?

I think you should answer your questions before insulting those who posess the answers.

You mentioned the need for the concept. Clear now?

Be more specific next time.

I'm sorry, I did not realize the depth of your stupidity until now. Will do.

Why don't you take more history courses? Many civilizations used religion to control others.

Wow, gee, Chosen, this is only one of the most obvious facts of history.

Simply because somthing comes to you as a revalation, does not mean that it comes to all as a revalation.

In any case, many things have been used to control people. This does not make these things necessary or moral.

Religion does it's bad and good. The concept of God isn't required to create order and no chaos. But some people (not all) have it for order. History proves it.

What good that could have been done via other methods?

"logical" one, look at the logical order of my paragraph.

Logic to you would be like water to a rabid dog. Fuck you.

Other than that, I don't suggest you argue any further here.

A: I'll do as I please.
B: Fuck you, you insipid little fool.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Xev
Look Chosen, I've been kind to you because you are a little boy who cannot get laid. Return this with respect, and I would advise you not to treat your superiors with contempt.

Who are my superiors? You? HAHAHA And I can't get laid? ASS-U-ME

Was that your idea of an insult, you dickless, intellectually-deficiant little spirocyte?

No, that was not an insult. Why don't you explain exactly where that fallacy applies to my paragraph about the concept of God?

And sorry I'm not dickless like you

I think you should answer your questions before insulting those who posess the answers.

Excuse? You can't answer my question? It's ok.

Do you feel threatened or something Xev? This is amusing.

You mentioned the need for the concept. Clear now?

Yes, for some, the concept of God was needed for people to satisfy their emotions and wishful thinking.

I answered your questions, now you should do the same.

Could you elaborate on how that fallacy is perfectly appropiate? If you can't answer, I understand.

I'm sorry, I did not realize the depth of your stupidity until now. Will do.

Care to prove it "almighty atheist"?

Wow, gee, Chosen, this is only one of the most obvious facts of history.

Hey maybe you do understand somethings after all...

Simply because somthing comes to you as a revalation, does not mean that it comes to all as a revalation.

Yes I understand that also. Same applies to you.

In any case, many things have been used to control people. This does not make these things necessary or moral.

For some it was necessary, some rather seek appeasement (idea of afterlife and so on, was very appealing) than understand - these are the "weak-minded" that are easily manipulated by religion(s). I avoided the generalization of all people or the whole world.

Logic to you would be like water to a rabid dog. Fuck you.

No need to be angry.

A: I'll do as I please.

Same goes for me woman.

B: Fuck you, you insipid little fool.

Why are you flaming? How does that fallacy apply to me? I told you DO NOT use a fallacy against me unless you are 100% sure it applies to me. You should've thought twice about it.

I've argued with many many atheists, I've been through the whole fallacy this and that crap. You are far the most short-tempered, how mature are you? Do you know how old I am?

I don't like people that assume, assumptions of people hold no weight in debates - don't piss me off, I don't play nice woman (or should I say little girl who likes to use profanity).

 

[Xev]

Who are my superiors? You? HAHAHA And I can't get laid? ASS-U-ME

Tyler, Cris, myself....

Oh come on Chosen, you practically scream "desperation". How old are you anyway? 15? 16? You've got much to learn.

No, that was not an insult. Why don't you explain exactly where that fallacy applies to my paragraph about the concept of God?

I have. You argued the need for a concept of God in order to maintain order. Appeal to consequences.

And sorry I'm not dickless like you

I'm female. You really do need to get laid if you do not realize that most women do not have dicks...

Excuse? You can't answer my question? It's ok.

Was that a question? Please learn to frame your questions better.

A concept is, to quote WordNet:

concept
n : an abstract or general idea inferred or derived from
specific instances [syn: conception, construct] [ant:
misconception]

That was simple. Try www.dict.org next time you have such a question.

Do you feel threatened or something Xev?

More like, bored and annoyed.

Yes, for some, the concept of God was needed for people to satisfy their emotions and wishful thinking.

Answered like an athiest.

Now, exactly how is this beneficial?

Could you elaborate on how that fallacy is perfectly appropiate? If you can't answer, I understand.

See above.

For some it was necessary, some rather seek appeasement (idea of afterlife and so on, was very appealing) than understand - these are the "weak-minded" that are easily manipulated by religion(s). I avoided the generalization of all people or the whole world.

Very nice. Now, relevence?

No need to be angry.

I am not. I am mildly annoyed, quite bored, and smiling as I type.

Why are you flaming?

I am not. I am being a bit acerbic and bitchy.

I note that you started this.

How does that fallacy apply to me? I told you DO NOT use a fallacy against me unless you are 100% sure it applies to me. You should've thought twice about it.

Nobody tells Xev what to do unless they have legitamate authority over her.

You are far the most short-tempered, how mature are you? Do you know how old I am?

A: Not at all. It only seems so because I really don't care about not offending you.

B: No idea. High school age, I think you implied once. Don't really care, although I'd be willing to cut you slack if you are younger than I am.

I don't like people that assume,

That's very nice, now explain to me why I should care?

don't piss me off,

Why not?

I don't play nice woman

I'm scared now.

(or should I say little girl who likes to use profanity).

Perhaps if you spent more time at the noun of fucking you would not be so shocked when I use the verb.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Xev


Tyler, Cris, myself....

No one is superior to me. What makes you think that anyway? Maybe because you are atheist, you are more superior than a theist?

Oh come on Chosen, you practically scream "desperation". How old are you anyway? 15? 16? You've got much to learn.

Whoops, sorry you're off. I'm older. Yea I do have much to learn, everyone here does.

I have. You argued the need for a concept of God in order to maintain order. Appeal to consequences.

Notice that paragraph kept mentioning "some" people. I argue that some people needed the concept of God to serve as a "moral absolute." I didn't at all mean you "need a concept of God in order to maintain order." It is not needed, but some people make it a necessity. The key is in "some people" not the concept being needed. History followed this path, without the concept of God, there would be chaos, but not total choas (however I may put it, my statement still remains valid). The concept of God also helped people to become limited, restricted within their society, look at the egyptians.

Answer me this question: Do you not agree that the concept of God is a matter of need for some?

Also order means "no chaos" - chaos is a state of disorder or confusion. The concept of God happily fitted in to clear up the confusion about man's existence, where did the world come from, and so on. So the concept of God in itself is not needed, the people made it become needed.

So don't you agree that the concept of God helped to create order? Look at the Egyptains, Sun God Ra, egyptians obeyed the Pharoah from such a concept.

Revelant to that one paragraph:

Description of Appeal to Consequences of a Belief
The Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief is a fallacy that comes in the following patterns:

X is true because if people did not accept X as being true then there would be negative consequences. - I didn't say God existed.

X is false because if people did not accept X as being false, then there would be negative consequences. - I didn't say God was false.

X is true because accepting that X is true has positive consequences. - I didn't say God existed.

X is false because accepting that X is false has positive consequences. - I didn't say God was false.

I wish that X were true, therefore X is true. This is known as Wishful Thinking. - This doesn't apply to me. I didn't mention "I wish" anything.

I wish that X were false, therefore X is false. This is known as Wishful Thinking. - Once again also doesn't apply to me.

This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the consequences of a belief have no bearing on whether the belief is true or false. For example, if someone were to say "If sixteen-headed purple unicorns don't exist, then I would be miserable, so they must exist" it would be clear that this would not be a good line of reasoning. It is important to note that the consequences in question are the consequences that stem from the belief. It is important to distinguish between a rational reason to believe (RRB) (evidence) and a prudential reason to believe (PRB) (motivation). A RRB is evidence that objectively and logically supports the claim. A PRB is a reason to accept the belief because of some external factor (such as fear, a threat, or a benefit or harm that may stem from the belief) that is relevant to what a person values but is not relevant to the truth or falsity of the claim. - I never talked about beliefs. Concepts, not beliefs.

The nature of the fallacy is especially clear in the case of Wishful thinking. Obviously, merely wishing that something is true does not make it true. This fallacy differs from the Appeal to Belief fallacy in that the Appeal to Belief involves taking a claim that most people believe that X is true to be evidence for X being true. - I didn't talk about God's existence.

Examples of Appeal to Consequences of a Belief

"God must exist! If God did not exist, then all basis for morality would be lost and the world would be a horrible place!" - Nope, I didn't say this.

"It can never happen to me. If I believed it could, I could never sleep soundly at night." - Nope

"I don't think that there will be a nuclear war. If I believed that, I wouldn't be able to get up in the morning. I mean, how depressing." - Nope

"I acknowledge that I have no argument for the existence of God. However, I have a great desire for God to exist and for there to be an afterlife. Therefore I accept that God exists." - Nope

I'm female. You really do need to get laid if you do not realize that most women do not have dicks...

LoL, what a frivolous claim! I guess I'm fortunate to not stumble upon a chick with a dick

A concept is, to quote WordNet:


That was simple. Try www.dict.org next time you have such a question.

GOOD. Now that fallacy points out and has written all over it "Belief, true, false" - How in the world does that apply to me?

1) I didn't say God existed.
2) Where do I talk about true and/or false?

More like, bored and annoyed.

You're just confused.

Answered like an athiest.

Now, exactly how is this beneficial?

I didn't say that was beneficial. I was once a "devout" atheist, until I learned how many atheists are so filled with hate (towards God and/or religions).

See above.

You still think it is appropiate?

Very nice. Now, relevence?

If I said "everyone" needed the concept of God, that is false. If I said "some" do, it's true. Do you agree that some do?

I am not. I am mildly annoyed, quite bored, and smiling as I type.

Good, because a use of profanity usally means: stress, anger, etc.

I am not. I am being a bit acerbic and bitchy.

"Fuck you" isn't flaming? Then what is?

I note that you started this.

LOL, "oh mommy, mommy, he started it!! and made me cry!" - haha

Nobody tells Xev what to do unless they have legitamate authority over her.

Chosen is under NO ONE's authority. Maybe you accept authority over you (you should, most woman like it ), but not me.

A: Not at all. It only seems so because I really don't care about not offending you.

That's good to know.

B: No idea. High school age, I think you implied once. Don't really care, although I'd be willing to cut you slack if you are younger than I am.

No, don't cut me slack. I have argued many older than you, I am sure of it. It's pathetic to appeal to age.

That's very nice, now explain to me why I should care?

You should. "Xev has a dick!! She is ugly as anything, even though I haven't seen her, I know this "

Did you like that assumption? So would you like people that assume?

Why not?

Why not piss you off? I have a good feeling we will perpertually argue. I'll show you how to debate.

I'm scared now.

Becareful, women like "dangerous" guys So please don't end up liking me (assumption), did you like me assuiming of you?

Perhaps if you spent more time at the noun of fucking you would not be so shocked when I use the verb.

Hahahaha, I'm not the virgin here, you are woman. Again, you liked the assumption?

 

[Xev]

Chosen:

No one is superior to me. What makes you think that anyway? Maybe because you are atheist, you are more superior than a theist?

Superior in the amount of knowledge they possess, my apologies if I was not clear enough on this.

No. It's a simple statement. You needed "concepts" explained to you.

Notice that paragraph kept mentioning "some" people. I argue that some people needed the concept of God to serve as a "moral absolute." I didn't at all mean you "need a concept of God in order to maintain order." It is not needed, but some people make it a necessity. The key is in "some people" not the concept being needed.

Okay good. Dispute is over when you explain the relevence.

I didn't say that was beneficial.

I'm sorry, I thought you had been arguing that religion was beneficial for some.

If I said "everyone" needed the concept of God, that is false. If I said "some" do, it's true. Do you agree that some do?

Define "need".
Likely I do not, but we'll see.

Good, because a use of profanity usally means: stress, anger, etc.

*Shrugs and points out that she will use profanity casually, but whatever*

"Fuck you" isn't flaming? Then what is?

Define "flaming". It has a different meaning in hackish. We're probably using different meanings.

LOL, "oh mommy, mommy, he started it!! and made me cry!" - haha

No. It's a point of honour for me that I never start conflicts with morons. I will tease, but I will let them start such conflict.

Chosen is under NO ONE's authority. Maybe you accept authority over you (you should, most woman like it ), but not me.

I accept the laws of my country and adhere to most of them. In exchange, I am afforded an extra measure of protection, above and beyond what I can provide myself.

Read Hobbes.

I suppose I could play uberXevsh and accept no laws, only the power that I possess, but I am not sure if that would be very logical. For one, I consider Freddy's ubermensch to be outside the realm of my protection.

Oh, and as for "most women", go discuss your sexual peculiarities with FoxMulder - he seems interested enough in "demonic bondage".

No, don't cut me slack. I have argued many older than you, I am sure of it. It's pathetic to appeal to age.

Yes it is. However, it would be dishonourable not to.

Did you like that assumption? So would you like people that assume?

I did not care.

I'll show you how to debate.

Umm, Chosen dear, you over-use emoticons and use phrases like "LOL".

This annoys most. Let's see if we can learn from each other, mmkay? I think you will teach me self-restraint in the face of annoyance.

Becareful, women like "dangerous" guys So please don't end up liking me (assumption), did you like me assuiming of you?

I neither liked nor disliked the assumption, I found it amusing.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Xev
Chosen:


Superior in the amount of knowledge they possess, my apologies if I was not clear enough on this.

My apoligies also, for not being clear about the concept of God. Just because you are more "wise" (older than I am) or possess more knowledge doesn't mean you're superior (but you know that ) I respect anyone who knows how to use their knowlegde.

I'm sorry, I thought you had been arguing that religion was beneficial for some.

It's beneficial to those that do not what to think thus "weak-minded" - why learn when God is the answer to everything

Define "need".
Likely I do not, but we'll see.

I consider need to be something require. My mother believes that you are required to believe in God, since He made us. I can only break them up into 3 different categories. They belive in God because...

1) They choose to (me)
2) They were raised this way
3) They were forced too

Define "flaming". It has a different meaning in hackish. We're probably using different meanings.

Flaming is extremely offensive insults. Like "Fuck you asshole, you can go to hell, you're stupid as a dog." I consider that a flame.

No. It's a point of honour for me that I never start conflicts with morons. I will tease, but I will let them start such conflict.

I was teasing also, until someone blew up, maybe you got this trait from Cris?

I accept the laws of my country and adhere to most of them. In exchange, I am afforded an extra measure of protection, above and beyond what I can provide myself.

I'm required to follow my laws, or else I go to jail but I don't consider anything superior than I am, you may think it's introverted thinking, but this way I am not restricted, I have no role models except myself. General superiority, not as in knowledge and so on, if you hack it down to that.

Only God is more superior than I am. Other than that, all humans are made of H20, carbons, and so on.

Oh, and as for "most women", go discuss your sexual peculiarities with FoxMulder - he seems interested enough in "demonic bondage".

Its instinct for women to be dominanted, you may not agree but it's how women think. "demonic bondage"? No, I'm not that nasty, sorry, not interested.

Yes it is. However, it would be dishonourable not to.

It's an internet forum, i could've lied about my age. Who would know? I could be lying right now. Good thing I am an honest person.

Thank you for the honor, but trust me I have no need for it.

Umm, Chosen dear, you over-use emoticons and use phrases like "LOL".

That's teasing. I admit, I am a provoker. Plus, life is fun, emoticons = fun. Women love fun, don't you think so? Of course you don't want a boring guy.

This annoys most. Let's see if we can learn from each other, mmkay? I think you will teach me self-restraint in the face of annoyance.

Sure no problem. It's called goading. The way I talk and post, it's like meat in front of a dog, then I throw it 100 feet away and there's the argument.

That is why I argue all the time. Arguing is fun and not boring. If gf and bf don't argue, they suck and are boring.

I neither liked nor disliked the assumption, I found it amusing.

You're an amusing person, well sometimes.

 

[Xev]

I consider need to be something require. My mother believes that you are required to believe in God, since He made us. I can only break them up into 3 different categories. They belive in God because...

1) They choose to (me)
2) They were raised this way
3) They were forced too

Mmmkay, very good. You learn fast. That is admirable.

Flaming is extremely offensive insults. Like "Fuck you asshole, you can go to hell, you're stupid as a dog." I consider that a flame.

"Fuck you" is not offensive per se. But fair definition. I do hate seeing the term "flaming" over-used.

http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/flame.html

I'm required to follow my laws, or else I go to jail

You thus accept authority.

Its instinct for women to be dominanted, you may not agree but it's how women think. "demonic bondage"? No, I'm not that nasty, sorry, not interested.

You'll break the poor man's heart. Now in that case, I'd advise you not to pontificate on subjects you know nothing of - it makes you look like a fool.

That's teasing. I admit, I am a provoker. Plus, life is fun, emoticons = fun. Women love fun, don't you think so? Of course you don't want a boring guy.

Good good, you're learning. See you around, Chosen.

 

[Tyler]

"It's beneficial to those that do not what to think thus "weak-minded" - why learn when God is the answer to everything."

In which case it is detrimental to society. If you have a bunch of closed-minded, uneducated morons do you wish to keep them as morons or educate them to the point of being logical, rational, tolerant and helpful citizens. Religion encourages the weak minded to be weak minded. I fail to see this as a plus.



"I consider need to be something require. My mother believes that you are required to believe in God, since He made us. I can only break them up into 3 different categories. They belive in God because...

1) They choose to (me)
2) They were raised this way
3) They were forced too"

Please define where you think the choice can come from? In my experience, the vast majority of theists have come from numero 2. Ask all the Christians in America if there parents were Christian. Guarantee you get a good majority saying yes.


"Its instinct for women to be dominanted, you may not agree but it's how women think. "demonic bondage"? No, I'm not that nasty, sorry, not interested."

Define dominated. Do you mean in sex? If so, in what way?



Oh, and if you find 'fuck you' offensive I would definetly advise stickign away from Xev!

 

[Jan Ardena]

The Chosen,

It's beneficial to those that do not what to think thus "weak-minded" - why learn when God is the answer to everything

Only God is more superior than I am. Other than that, all humans are made of H20, carbons, and so on.

Acouple of questions,

1. What/who is God to you?

2. Do you know anybody that does not want to think?

Tyler,

In which case it is detrimental to society. If you have a bunch of closed-minded, uneducated morons do you wish to keep them as morons or educate them to the point of being logical, rational, tolerant and helpful citizens. Religion encourages the weak minded to be weak minded. I fail to see this as a plus.

When you use the term ‘religion’ are you refering to scriptures or mans interpretation of the scriptures?
If you are refering to both, can you show me where the scriptures encourage people to be weak minded?

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Xev
You'll break the poor man's heart. Now in that case, I'd advise you not to pontificate on subjects you know nothing of - it makes you look like a fool.

Right, sure there. I don't need to prove myself

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Tyler
In which case it is detrimental to society. If you have a bunch of closed-minded, uneducated morons do you wish to keep them as morons or educate them to the point of being logical, rational, tolerant and helpful citizens. Religion encourages the weak minded to be weak minded. I fail to see this as a plus.

There are weak minded people, and the "what" in mysentence was meant to be "want"

Many people don't wish to explore the truth, they are weak minded and do not want to think. It's sad is, but that is who they are.

Organized religion helps to restrict the minds, agreed.

Please define where you think the choice can come from? In my experience, the vast majority of theists have come from numero 2. Ask all the Christians in America if there parents were Christian. Guarantee you get a good majority saying yes.

My choice comes from my experiences. I will explain in depth later.

[bDefine dominated. Do you mean in sex? If so, in what way?

[/b]

Real Men way, women want real men, not chumps. If you don't understand that, then I suggest you start to understand women. If you do understand then good for you

Boys think, Men decide.

 

[Tyler]

"When you use the term ‘religion’ are you refering to scriptures or mans interpretation of the scriptures?
If you are refering to both, can you show me where the scriptures encourage people to be weak minded?"

I'll go find a quote if you wish. But I'm sure you know there are places in the Bible and Qu'ran that demand a follower believe 100%. Full, 100% belief means that you do not believe there is a chance you're wrong. Which is closed-minded ignorance.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by Tyler
I'll go find a quote if you wish. But I'm sure you know there are places in the Bible and Qu'ran that demand a follower believe 100%.

Please do!

Full, 100% belief means that you do not believe there is a chance you're wrong.

If you can find anybody who has a full 100% belief in anything, that in itself would be a remarkable feat.

Which is closed-minded ignorance.

What is close-minded ignorance is believing that life came from nothing even though you have never experienced it, knowing that scientists haven't proved it as fact, but waiting for it to be proven.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[~The_Chosen~]

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
A couple of questions,

1. What/who is God to you?

2. Do you know anybody that does not want to think?

1) I believe God to be a being that is eternal, perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, and creator of the universe. He is the ultimate truth that I wish to seek.

2) My mother. She is a devout Roman Catholic. She accepts basically anything the church says. It's sickening to me. I once missed church, then she went on a crazy tirade saying I will be doomed in hell and so on. I skipped my classes one day and she starts yelling to me that the devil has won me over and once again, go to hell. After that I turned atheist, emotionally, I was fed up with all that crap. But now I'm a theist, non-denominational.

Another is a Baptist Church I attended. The priest said all people that do not believe in God are evil. That is not true at all, worst of all, everyone in that dump church clapped their hands. It's stupid.

I am bad-mouthing fellow denominational theists, but not all are like that, just some of the ones I've encountered.